Nikon Z 100-400mm vs 70-200mm f/2.8 with a TELECONVERTER? THE FIELD TEST
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ย. 2024
- You asked and so we've answered - we've finally managed to compare the Nikkor Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S against the 70-200mm f/2.8 VR S + TC-2.0x
We were looking for sharpness, speed of focusing and overall convenience, and the answer isn't as easy as you'd think...
We shot this in a live field environment, so although they aren't lab tests they do give an accurate idea of how the equipment would perform in real-world situations.
In this video:
70-200mm f/2.8 VR S
shop.graysofwe...
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S
shop.graysofwe...
Teleconverter TC-2.0X
shop.graysofwe...
Contribute to our Coffee Fund: paypal.me/GoWL...
Check our our website and e-shop: shop.graysofwe...
**Our e-shop is open! We ship to the EU and UK, as well as the USA and Canada. For orders from the rest of the world , send us an email at info@graysofwestminster.co.uk or call us +44 (0)20-7828 4925**
Presentation:
Rebecca Danese: bit.ly/Bex_on_I...
Konstantin Kochkin: bit.ly/kon_on_i...
Claim £15 off your basket : shop.graysofwe...
with Coupon Code: YTLIVE22
(minimum spend £50, can be used in conjunction with other coupons or discounts, excludes merchandise)
Subscribe to our newsletter to get updates about our offers: bit.ly/newslet...
Contact us: media@graysofwestminster.co.uk
MUSIC by Epidemic Sound:
Prescient by Howard Harper-Barnes
La Danse Timide by Howard Harper-Barnes
A Delightful Evening by Francis Wells
Puppy Tales by Stationary Sign
#nikon #photography #nikonz
Very useful comparison, thank you so much! It helped me to make finally my decision for the Z 100-400 S, plus TC 1.4, instead for the Z 70-200 S plus TC 2.0. Both are outstanding combinations, but for my nature and landscape photography the 100-400 + TC 1.4- combo is even more versatile in the field. It also has a shorter minimum distance - great for smaller animals which are 1-4 meter away.
Kind regards from Switzerland.
I am fortunate to own both lenses and the Z9 so this isn't an issue for me however, I will say that my experience with the Z TC 2 teleconverter is that image quality is a little softer on focus than I would prefer. Still usable images, you can see the softness as you travel across the face of the lens. I don't think you will be unhappy with either solution although some may find the softness unacceptable.
I used the z70-200 wh the 2xTC in the Galapagos recently - I tried to rent the 100-400 but its so rare! Pretty pleased overall
Great comparison. This is what i have been waiting for, a review on 70-200 vs 100-400 z mount with TC. I have 70-200 with TC 2x and shoot surfer. It was a little soft but it was a user error. My shutter speed was below 400. Next time I’ll try to shoot above 1000. Though i ordered 100-400 and it’s arriving this Sunday to pair with my Z9. So now I’ll need to sell my trusty 200-400 f4. Love to keep it but it’s just too heavy with Z9.
what was your experience. Which do you recommend on z9. Thanks
Make mine the 70-200 f2.8 and the 400 f4.5 plus 1.4 S x convertor
Thank you for a great comparison, I was really curious how those lenses perform as I considered both. Finally, I'll go with 70-200 + TC 1.4 to have that bit extra focal length
The 100mm-400mm with the 1.4 teleconverter gives me 560mm, a little more reach than the 70mm-200mm with the teleconverter. So that lens makes sense for me.
I wish I could get one 1.4 for my sigma 100-400 mm e-mount
Wonderful video entertaining and informative. Thanks to you both
Excellent !
Thank you! Nice comparisons and well done.
Thanks very much guys this is exactly what I wanted to know!
This was a good video. Informative. Maybe some sample files one of these days?I like the bloopers at the end of your videos. I don't get why you're only at 14k subscribers cuz you guys are fun. Oh yeah, Happy 4th of July from America.
Awesome review!! I am old school and am still hanging on to my D850, but also shoot with a Z6. Most of the reviews that I have seen for the new 100-400 S lens have been on the Z9. Your review of both the 70-200 and the 100-400, with both of the tele-converters, was perfect!! Thanks very much for sharing this comparison!!
I found the same thing as well. 70-200mm with the 2.0x telelconverter at 200/400mm was a bit soft.
Indeed the 70-200mm with TC2.0 is a little soft. I've been using this combo for over a year and can confirm. It still provides great IQ but if you're looking for the tack sharpness at f/5.6 this might leave you a little short at times.
Also, I'll add that if you have the resolution to crop the other option is just crop the 70-200mm image in post or use DX mode. DX mode gives a 1.5x crop and delivers 20mp images.
So consider that you could, with DX mode get out to 600mm equivalent on both options.
Ok I think I will get the 100-400mm. I was on the fence with the Z 70-200mm F/2.8. I have the F mount equivalent of the Z lens thru Tamron. The less weight of the lens and longer focal length will suit me fine. BTW picked up another Z 28mm F/2.8 SE lens and slapped it on my Zfc which I also have it on the Z5 and love the lens. HDR is fabulous especially doing video. Question: Why not use the Z5 on video with the 1.7 crop with the 100-400mm? Stay Safe and Keep Smiling! Cheers! BTW the state bird for Alaska are Mosquito. 🦟
70-200 + tc 2.0 is my choice. Just one photographer's opinion. But I also own the 500mm pf so an easy choice for me. So many choices these days. Wow.
Are you satisfied with the quality /sharpness ?
The real test is the 100-400 v the 400 4.5? Get Ricci on the phone. Tell him the people are demanding, there may be a revolt if you don't get one. Or is it the people are already revolting? Yes, I run a shop too! ;oP
Ricci did post a video with some preliminary results. The Z 100-400 and the Z 400 f4.5 are virtually the same in terms of sharpness at 400mm with no TC's. He did show the Z 400 f4.5 with the 2x TC vs the Z 800, and I was surprised how badly the Z 400 F4.5 performed at 800mm. No one expects phenomenal results with a 2x TC, but it looked very poor to me. Much worse than the Z 70-200 or Z 100-400 when they are paired with the 2x TC. Its very preliminary, though, so take this with a grain of salt. Also, Ricci's sharpness test is not the be all end all of sharpness tests. I am more interested in seeing field results than lab results.
Absolutely love the way you both present this ,well done. Still can’t hit that checkout button though as I’m dithering around so much . I get all the pros and cons for both. I know I want to have a crack at wildlife photography but will i regret not going all in on a 100-400 with tele converter for that extra distance compared to the 2.8 of the 70-200 or then having confused myself even more looking at the 200-500 with z converter mount . HELP!
love the GBBO vibe of your videos
I didn’t get that good of image quality with the 2x teleconverter on either lens. The 1.4 is great though.
Great piece of work again.
What you should test is simply running the images shot on the 70-200 through Gigapixel Ai. Do that and you may agree that what we already have, is, thanks to Ai software ...a far more sensible option than forking over thousands of dollars foe a heavy, inconvenient lens that with today's software, is about as practical as a boat anchor in your camera bag.
Excellent review, thank you
Hi guys, I use the Nikon Z 70-200mm 2.8 with a tele converter TC 2.0. I had had very good results with it on a safari. I could also imagine List 1.4 Tele Converter could work a little smoother and better, since it also offers more light intensity. But overall I am absolutely convinced of this lens. Alternatively, I would probably use the 400 mm 4.0 fixed focal length
It probably makes a difference if this decision represents the "long end" of a person's lens portfolio or is intended to cover the middle range. In my case, 75% of my photos are at 400mm or more. So the question becomes are the remaining photos mostly between 100 and 200 or between 200 and 400. This decision would be a lot easier if Nikon would finally release a Z 200-600 f5.6 (weather sealed, internal zoom!). Focal length versatility is one issue, but the option to open up to 2.8 is always welcome. Nonetheless, a very informative comparison - thanks!
I liked this format you chose for showing the differences and similarities, and the options available. I have the 100-400 and debated on that or the 70-200 and since they were the same size/weight and basic IQ, I decided on the longer reach and have the TC 1.4x coming one of these days. I have other options for portraiture so the longer reach to a potential of 560 at just under f8 suits my needs. I don't use that distance often but I'm going to carry any lens that weight, I want the payoff if the occasion presents itself. Thanks as usual for all things Nikon. Hoping you'll have some good firmware news on what seems to be my forgotten Z 7ii. All the hype on the better processor for upgrades and it's not getting the love...
I purchased a Z50 body instead of a TC för my Z6. Happy.
Great review! Thank you.
always brilliant video yet informative
Thank you very much. Interesting comparison since I am about to buy the 100-400, or the 70-200 + 2x TC. Sine I mostly need the 200-400 range, I think the 100-400 is the best option.
Thank you!
The 70-2020 held up really well IMO. Now that the 400 4.5 enters the match I'm curious to see how much better to the former with 2X TC looks like.
I will have both for African Wild Life >> the 100-400 isnt as sharp on the Long end and over priced as a result
That was exactly what I wanted to know! But I already have the 70-200 f./2.8, damn! I can't have both, can I? So I think I wait for the 200-600.
that's why I got the 2xTC - as a stop-gap until we see the 200-600 in ... 2024?
I'm in the same boat. I have 70-200 Z and it's great but I need extra focal length. I'd love to be able to save $$$ and use a TC but I feel I probably need 400 4.5 or 200-600 Z. But which one?! Anyone, any thoughts?
Very useful!
i have the Z 70/180 F2.8 I think that I will get the TC 1.4 to have a 100/250 F4 and when I need i will use the DX crop of my Z7 for a 150 375 F4.
Good video. I was considering buying the Z 800 PF but at 6500 for my Z 9 and 100-400 Z lens I'll just get the 1.4 TC.
Lindos cervos, ficaria muito feliz com a 70-200, mas ambas são excelentes lentes, vou escrever uma cartinha para o Papai Noel e ver se o bom velinho me presenteia com a lente e uma camara Nikon Z8 tambem, hehe. Abraços, Sucesso e Deus vos abençoe.
What about bokeh and back light contrast? Sharpness is not everything. I would love to see a comparison of the two with an evening shot full open with some various light sources in the background. Candles, Christmas lights, traffic lights, sunlight, leaves&branches etc. I did not make my decision yet, but for sure I will not purchase both. Did anyone do wedding with the 100-400? I mean, the lenses weigh the same, so having the extra 200-400 is almost for free, is my opinion. ISO will compensate for the less light. I do have a 2nd body and 24-70 and the 85. f1.8.
Nice comparison and summary. I also loved the music, but I don't recognize it. What is it?
We've added the music to the bottom of the description for you :)
Can you use 2x2x ? So in total 800mm instead of 200mm?
no you can't.
👍🏾🙏🏾
Great video to watch some 200 and something years later after we got freedom from you blokes!
??????? What's that got to do with a lens comparison? Oh, was there a similar comparison done 200 and something years ago you missed and you've only just got your freedom so you've now been able to watch? D-H.
@@grantking4681 haha. Happy 4th!
Happy 4th!
Soooo disappointed with this, not one flower shot taken by Becky. 😭😂
nice video.. but i am waiting for 200 600 patiently like a stone.😇
I’m also waiting for the Z8ii.
Same. Screaming silently every single day.
Me too!
Even though 100-400mm f4 has some advantages, I can't leave 70-200mm f2.8 behind anyways...those slight differences will be fixed with AI software.
Try using bean bags, when resting on logs etc, at least it would keep lens free from damage. Monopod/ tripod even better.
Just crop .save your coin
I won't say you've made my decision of which to buy first any easier - but I GREATLY appreciate the info. TY for doing this.
Just in time review - very good - excatly what I was thinking about for the last weeks!!!
Going to Antarctica in Dec. and having nightmares about how to carry my 200-400 beast (that I bought and used specifcially for some Africa Safaris - where I loved it, shooting off a beanbag as support from SafariJeep - no tripod). I thought of bringing my old D800 and leave the F 200-400 on there and my Z6 with the Z 24-70. I used aNIKON TC F Mount converter before and was very dissapointed and sold it. I was looking into the Z 100-400, but I think your video convinced me to use my Z 70-200 instead and get the TC 2.0 converter and invest the money I saved into a second Z body. Having two Z-bodies instead of one Z and one F will aslo make life much easier.
So if I get good results out of this set-up in antarctica I might sell my beloved F200-400. If this does not work as expected I might have to chase you down:) - because I probably won't get a second chance to try this out in Antarctica...
So anyone interested in a used Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-400mm f/4G ED VR II Lens - conctact me. It would make my decision even easier.
Can i use a nikon teleconverter with a Tamron zoom lens on a nikon z camera?
Helpful and confirms my choice for the Z 100 - 400 plus the 1.4
Exactly what I wanted to know. Thank you!
You need to give music credits. I kept watching for the music, not the lens work inasmuch as the economics of these lenses and TCs is beyond me at this time.
We've popped the music credits in the description for you :)
Lots of Love ❤🙌
You really need 70-200 + 200-600. And SONY body :-D