nikkor 400mm lens

I'm considering purchasing a zoom-nikkor lens. Any opinions regarding the 80-400mm vs. the 200-400mm? I know little regarding lens of this size, so any info is greatly appreciated.

I've had both and used them extensively. My experience with them was on a D2x and s. I found the 80-400 to be very slow focusing and soft. In my opinion, this is not a lens you want to use if your goal is high quality, tack sharp images and quick action shots. The 200-400 is much better and seems to be a very popular lens. Sharper images and much faster focusing but I was still disappointed with the results. I lost confidence in the lens because I was never sure whether or not the shot would be sharp. Sometimes it was very good, other times it was also soft. I also had VERY poor results when using it with a 1.4x converter. I wouldn't even consider it on the 80-400. For what 200-400 lens costs, for me, it was not worth it. If you don't need the zoom feature, I would go with a prime 400 or 500. I have never used either of these prime lenses so Im just guessing at that recommendation. I was so disappointed in the lack of consistency in my pics with those lenses that I dumped all my Nikon equipment and switched to Canon. I was a life-long Nikon shooter and an NPS member and I don't get into the "one is better than the other" argument but I can say that after my switch to Canon and fixed, long lenses my images improved dramatically. I would like to say it was the difference between prime and zoom lenses that made the difference in the pics.

I have the 80-400mm VR and it's pretty good as a general purpose lens. I have had images shot with it published. The AF is very slow, and although I sometimes used a 1.4x with it when shooting the F100,, I don't do it with the D80. Not quite sharp enough. I got to shoot with the 200-400mm one afternoon, and it's a big improvement. I liked the lens speed, the AF was noticeably faster, and it was a bit sharper. However, no way I can justify buying something like that. If I needed the length, I'd buy another Nikon 500mm f4, used. A used Sigma 500mm f4.5 might be a very good deal too. I'm not a bird photographer though.


Kent in SD

Don, great to see you here. Welcome, my friend.

Hey Steve. I wondered if we'd cross paths.

BTW Don, those crane shots you sent from Bosque del Apache were great. I meant to let you know that.

Zandall, sorry for pulling this thread off into left field. And now, back to the topic!

I have both these lenses and find them quite good, but for different uses. The 80-400 is good for those things that do not move very fast (ie: it doesn't focus very fast). It seems to be a little less than tack sharp in some instances and quite frankly I can't tell you what they are. The 200-400 is a terrific lens and has never dissappointed me in any respect (of course for the price you would expect it to be good). I use it hand held for flying birds with great results. I have not had the trouble Don and I use it on the D2X, D2H, and the D200 all with great results.

Agree with the comments about the slow focus on the 80-400. I have found it is very sharp in the f 8-10 range. Above and below only so so. I have the 200-400VR and it is simply the best lens I have ever used. Very sharp and fast to focus. I have a good luck with the 1.4 TC slower focus though. The 2.0 TC does not work well for me - the images are not sharp enough.

Mack Barham

Don't have any background with the 200-400, but I do own the 80-400. It's not a fast lens, either in aperture or in AF speed. But on a D2X it's acceptable for me. I used to mount this lens on an F100, and it was reliable as advertised; on a digital body, the VR system seems a bit less forgiving - probably due to the old VR system (this was Nikon's first VR lens) and the digital magnification, but possibly due to several Nikon repairs performed on my lens.

The 80-400 is very, very picky about what's in front of the lens. Keep it clean, and buy only the best filters for it. I had some early issues with a bad filter and focus... Also, the tripod collar that comes with it isn't always the best bet for stability, and extra care needs to be taken when mounting this lens to a tripod. And I'll second Mack's f-stop recommendations.

If you've got the cash and won't miss 80-200 for various reasons, get the 200-400 IMHO. It's heavier, but faster in all respects and better glass to boot.

I have had extensive experience with the 200-400 and can say that it is a great lens. I found it to be extremely sharp, great contrast, and with good colour saturation. Very good bokeh as well. VR works very well and the lens is surprisingly well-balanced for a lens of its size - you CAN hand-hold the lens for in-flight bird shots (though I prefer the 200 f2 with a 1.4x tele for shooting birds in flight). I have had good experience with the 1.4x tele with it, but only when stopped down to f8 or smaller. Keep in mind that the 200-400 is quite the cannon to lug around - make sure you're REALLY prepared to put in the effort carrying this thing...

One word of caution - I have a friend in Austria who owns this lens and shoots it on a D200. He's on his second body now and will have to replace it soon - apparently the lens is so long and heavy (and with such leverage) that he's damaged both camera's lens mounts. Apparently there is one fewer screw in the mounting plate of the D200 (compared to the D2X0.

I recently purchased the 200 f2 VR and have a strange suggestion for you: consider the 200 f2 instead! Huh? Besides being probably the sharpest lens Nikon has ever made, the 200 f2 works shockingly well with teleconverters (6 months ago I HATED teleconverters, but the 200 f2 has gone a long ways towards changing my mind). I prefer the images shot with my 200 f2 and the 1.4x tele over those I have shot with my 300 f2.8 VR (which I'll now sell). Plus, the 200 f2 works extremely well with both the 1.7x and the 2x teles - at virtually ALL apertures. Really. So for less than the price of the 200-400 you can get the 200 f2 and ALL three teles and have a whole lot less weight to carry. Plus you'd have the sharpest 200 on the planet!

Just my two bits worth.