Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
Main Photography Discussion
Nikon 80-400 with vr
Page <prev 2 of 2
Mar 26, 2021 14:31:06   #
Photomac Loc: The Dalles, Or
 
All good comments. I have the 80-400. It was sub-optimal until it quit working. Sent it to Tech repair, near B&H. It returned working better than new. Sharp and reasonably fast. I think the essence of this issue is accurately understanding it's purpose in your photography. Its a great walk around lens for subjects reasonably close, but clearly falls off at distance. I've had a Tamron 150-600 and found it too slow for BIF, missing as many as 50% while on the Amazon. I was not happy. After researching the issue, again I bought the 80-400 and it worked for its purpose. I have a 200-400 and a 600. They both do the job for a dedicated task at distance, both too heavy for a walk around. There a very good reviews of the Sigma 150-600, and I think better than the Nikon 200-500 in both lens/image quality and durability. Good luck.

Reply
Mar 26, 2021 15:28:16   #
willy6419
 
Thanks

It sucks having a budget, but wanting the best knowing practical pricing have compromises

I’ll test the top recommendations

Thanks

Reply
Mar 26, 2021 19:29:49   #
Architect1776 Loc: In my mind
 
Rick from NY wrote:
I owned the original D version and it was slow to AF and not particularly sharp. Seldom used it for moving subjects. When the new one came out, I got one and it was a giant improvement. I use it regularly with my D500 and D850 when need to limit weight and need zoom capability. I find it exceptionally sharp and very fast and accurate AF, but very expensive. I have not compared it with the 200-500 or any of the off brand models. However, it is not like my 400/2.8 in AF speed or IQ, but not much out there is equal to the 400/2.8.

I have never fully bought in to the crop factor argument though. With the large size files from the D850, I can and do crop in to a D850 image to create a result similar to the crop effect of the dx body. I bought a D500 to have a smaller, lighter alternative to the 850 and also to carry as a second body. I find the hi iso performance of the 850 to be a lot better than the 500, so I often shoot with the 850 and crop rather than 500 if light is an issue.

And please don’t let the pro/con argument about crop factor overtake the discussion of the lens. My conclusions are based on my hands on tests of what works for me.
I owned the original D version and it was slow to... (show quote)



Reply
 
 
Mar 26, 2021 23:50:13   #
shutterbob Loc: Tucson
 
The 80-400 D is a pretty good lens, and you can find good used ones for $400 or less. It is reasonably sharp. Auto focus is VERY slow. Found it to be useless for BIF shots. The newer AFS lens is much quicker but is expensive. I would rather (for less money) look at the 200-500 or a Tamron 150-600 G2.

Reply
Mar 27, 2021 00:06:46   #
willy6419
 
Thanks

Reply
Mar 27, 2021 02:01:45   #
alphadog
 
Owned the 200 500, maybe a bad copy, who can know... bottom line: not sharp certain distances and at 300 even when tuned IN... compared to a friends 300 Star prime lens was NOT in the same ballpark. I bought it new from B&H and returned it for the nikon 300 f4...which was as sharp as my friends, if NOT sharper.

I learned several things: Primes are always sharper than zooms, many of the Thailand zooms may not be good copies... since that time, I ONLY buy primes, I do know others have good luck and images with their zooms..

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.