shot with the 400mm F/2.8

HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
edited January 17, 2006 in Wildlife
Hi y'all,

On Sunday I met up with some shooters from the Nikon Café and did some shooting. One of the folks had the Nikon 400mm F/2.8 D lens and he let me stick my D2H on it and take a few shots.

This lens is a Monster. Its vital stats are:weight 9.7 pounds; length 13.9"; minimum focusing distance 11.4'. Needless to say this is not a lens that one would handhold unless under the influence of some major recreational drug.

I shot it with the a Gitzo 1325 Tripod and Wimberly head. I used the 1.7 TC with it. From the few shot I took I was amazed at how quickly it focused. Even with the 1,7 TC it focused faster than any other lens I have used to date. Shooting with was an absolute pleasure. I found the color rendition to be excellent with great contrast. If you have $7700 to spend on a lens this would be a fine purchase.

Unfortunately there weren't too many targets around when I shot with it but here are a few images. Note the exif shows a 900+mm focal length. This comes from the 400 X 1.7 TC = 680 X 1.5 (D2H mag factor) = 930mm or 950mm.

52787154-O.jpg

52787162-O.jpg

52787164-O.jpg

52787168-O.jpg
Harry
http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"

Comments

  • Lee MasseyLee Massey Registered Users Posts: 274 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harryb wrote:
    This lens is a Monster. Its vital stats are:weight 9.7 pounds; length 13.9"; minimum focusing distance 11.4'. Needless to say this is not a lens that one would handhold unless under the influence of some major recreational drug.

    9.7 pounds?

    :jawdrop

    It makes sense given the f/2.8 but wow... Fast focusing too?

    Your post begs the question... When are you getting one for your D2X? :D

    Lee
  • RohirrimRohirrim Registered Users Posts: 1,889 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Very sweet lens, I can see that it produces exceptional images. And light too, compared to Canons 400 2.8 at 11.7lbs. :lift :lol4

    Does this lens have any image stabilization?
    Steve
    My Photo gallery- rohirrim.smugmug.com
    Selective Sharpening Tutorial
    Making a Frame for your image (Tutorial)
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Lee Massey wrote:
    9.7 pounds?

    :jawdrop

    It makes sense given the f/2.8 but wow... Fast focusing too?

    Your post begs the question... When are you getting one for your D2X? :D

    Lee

    Hey Lee,

    I loved that lens but I will take a pass on it. With the D2X arriving tomorrow Linda would kill me if I suggested spending $8000 on some glass. Also I'm very happy with the 500mm which gives me more reach and is a bit easier to tote around.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Rohirrim wrote:
    Very sweet lens, I can see that it produces exceptional images. And light too, compared to Canons 400 2.8 at 11.7lbs. :lift :lol4

    Does this lens have any image stabilization?

    Hey Steve,

    The lens does not have VR. I think it would be useless anyhow as this is a lens that you would always shoot off a tripod.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Was it the white one harry or did you wrap some white cloth around it ?

    Clean shots for a TC btw thumb.gif
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Humungus wrote:
    Was it the white one harry or did you wrap some white cloth around it ?

    Clean shots for a TC btw thumb.gif

    Errr, Gus we are Nikon shooters not Canon wannabees. If we had a white lens we would paint it black (song cue, bring on the Stones). DJ.gif

    I was impressed how it shot with the 1.7 TC. I have used the1.7 before with other lenses and didn't like it. This is the first lens that I have found the 1.7 to work well with.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • ThusieThusie Registered Users Posts: 1,818 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Impressive! Very. But hey look who was holding the camerathumb.gif
  • wxwaxwxwax Registered Users Posts: 15,471 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Man, I'd love to play with a fast 400. But the price, the price.... :uhoh
    Sid.
    Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
    http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
  • RohirrimRohirrim Registered Users Posts: 1,889 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harryb wrote:
    Hey Steve,

    The lens does not have VR. I think it would be useless anyhow as this is a lens that you would always shoot off a tripod.

    I have to respectfully disagree with that. While I shoot with my 500 mm on a Tripod almost all the time, I still keep the IS on. I think it helps with those little vibrations from wind etc.

    I've read a couple reviews that also feel the IS is helpful even on a tripod
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/500vs600.shtml
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-500mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

    Maybe black lenses don't need this :D
    Steve
    My Photo gallery- rohirrim.smugmug.com
    Selective Sharpening Tutorial
    Making a Frame for your image (Tutorial)
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Thusie wrote:
    Impressive! Very. But hey look who was holding the camerathumb.gif

    That is very kind. I'm so touched I will not rag you about your next tree rat shot. :D
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    wxwax wrote:
    Man, I'd love to play with a fast 400. But the price, the price.... :uhoh

    I know about the price but what the hell. All that stuff about three meals a day is just propaganda from the food industry. rolleyes1.gif
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Rohirrim wrote:
    I have to respectfully disagree with that. While I shoot with my 500 mm on a Tripod almost all the time, I still keep the IS on. I think it helps with those little vibrations from wind etc.

    I've read a couple reviews that also feel the IS is helpful even on a tripod
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/500vs600.shtml
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-500mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

    Maybe black lenses don't need this :D

    You might disagree but you would be wrong oh resident of Canonland. This is Nikon we are talking about and our VR is different from your IS. The VR would help on a monopod or on a wobbly cheap tripod (if you can't afford a decent tripod you can't afford a 400mm 2.8). However on a tripod one reviewer reported this with the 300.28 VR lens "With VR switched on and using the lens hand-held, I managed to get quite sharp images at 1/10 sec. A pity then that the same 1/10 sec yielded unsharp images with the lens on a tripod, if VR was activated".
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • RohirrimRohirrim Registered Users Posts: 1,889 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harryb wrote:
    You might disagree but you would be wrong oh resident of Canonland. This is Nikon we are talking about and our VR is different from your IS. The VR would help on a monopod or on a wobbly cheap tripod (if you can't afford a decent tripod you can't afford a 400mm 2.8). However on a tripod one reviewer reported this with the 300.28 VR lens "With VR switched on and using the lens hand-held, I managed to get quite sharp images at 1/10 sec. A pity then that the same 1/10 sec yielded unsharp images with the lens on a tripod, if VR was activated".

    Oh, I didn't realize that Nikon's VR wasn't as advanced as Canons IS. mwink.gif The IS on the Canon senses when vibrations decrease to a low enough level and will turn itself off. rolleyes1.gif
    Steve
    My Photo gallery- rohirrim.smugmug.com
    Selective Sharpening Tutorial
    Making a Frame for your image (Tutorial)
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Rohirrim wrote:
    Oh, I didn't realize that Nikon's VR wasn't as advanced as Canons IS. mwink.gif The IS on the Canon senses when vibrations decrease to a low enough level and will turn itself off. rolleyes1.gif

    That's cool but the Canon lenses are heavier than the Nikon lenses. I have not needed VR when shooting off my tripod. I will just have to struggle along with my humble VR-less 500mm F/4.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harry,

    Nice shooting with a big, heavy, long lens like that.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    Harry,

    Nice shooting with a big, heavy, long lens like that.

    It was easy. My friend had the lens set-up on the tripod. All I had to do was stick my camera body on it and shoot. If I owned that lens I would need a sherpa to carry it.

    If I ever buy it I will have a job opening for someone interested in low wages and abuse. Please submit your resume and references. rolleyes1.gif
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harryb wrote:
    It was easy. My friend had the lens set-up on the tripod. All I had to do was stick my camera body on it and shoot. If I owned that lens I would need a sherpa to carry it.

    If I ever buy it I will have a job opening for someone interested in low wages and abuse. Please submit your resume and references. rolleyes1.gif


    Somehow I think working for you, Harry, would be like working for Al Pacino in "Scent of a Woman." Blind and cranky.

    Or maybe it's "Scarface"....not sure which.
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • pathfinderpathfinder Super Moderators Posts: 14,708 moderator
    edited January 17, 2006
    Rohirrim wrote:
    I have to respectfully disagree with that. While I shoot with my 500 mm on a Tripod almost all the time, I still keep the IS on. I think it helps with those little vibrations from wind etc.

    I've read a couple reviews that also feel the IS is helpful even on a tripod
    http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/500vs600.shtml
    http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-500mm-f-4.0-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

    Maybe black lenses don't need this :D


    Me too - I keep IS on, whether on a tripod or not!thumb.gif

    I will say that I have had lustful thoughts about a 400 f2.8. That focal length can be purchased with smaller aperatures and less weight. But the thought of a 1.4 or 2.0 TX on a 400 f2.8 lens is enough to get very excited about. It would yield about a f4 600mm or an f5.6 800mm - now that really is some reach!! And it would weigh less than corresponding primes I suspect. For wildlife, sometimes, 500 is just not enough.
    Pathfinder - www.pathfinder.smugmug.com

    Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    Somehow I think working for you, Harry, would be like working for Al Pacino in "Scent of a Woman." Blind and cranky.

    Or maybe it's "Scarface"....not sure which.


    I wish i could tango like Pacino in "Scent of a Woman".

    Cranky!?!?!?!? Me????headscratch.gifne_nau.gif

    I'm the most amiable guy around. In fact in the old paper version of Websters under the definition for Amiable they had a picture of my smiling face. rolleyes1.gif
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • DavidTODavidTO Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 19,160 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    Harryb wrote:
    I wish i could tango like Pacino in "Scent of a Woman".

    Cranky!?!?!?!? Me????headscratch.gifne_nau.gif


    Well, you didn't put up a fight about being blind!
    Moderator Emeritus
    Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited January 17, 2006
    DavidTO wrote:
    Well, you didn't put up a fight about being blind!


    You got me there.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
Sign In or Register to comment.