I read that the teleconvertors available we not compatable with the z 100-400nm.
Nick
January 29, 2024 3:04 am
I’d love to see an updated comparison with the Nikon Z 180-600 and the Tamron 150-500 now available. Those are two compelling options at much lower price points.
Peter
December 24, 2023 11:47 am
So, I own the Z 70-200 f2,8 and the Z 100-400 f4,5-5,6 with the Nikon Z f and Z fc instead of the tc‘s and I feel very fine with that option. However, I really would like a test review, taking this combination into account. From my amateur- perspective, the Z fc makes much more sense, than a tc.
Robert John
November 8, 2023 4:55 pm
Interesting. By comparison, my 70-300E and 500/5.6, used, cost me £2,600. That’s quite a bit cheaper than the 100-400 bearing in mind that with a 35mm camera, 400mm doesn’t cut it for wildlife (it’s much smaller in the U.K.) so it really needs a £500 TC. And if one has a mid-range z-mount, it’s only 10mp in dx mode (and Nikon doesn’t make a decent aps-c z-mount camera, nor does it look like it will). I don’t fancy 560mm at f8. The only z-mount that would make sense is a 33mp £2,500 (max) Z6iii. That could take a 24-70/120/200, 70-180/f2.8 and 400/f4.5 and 1.4TC, and give 14mp in dx mode. Looks good. But it’s a whopping £8,200. That’s why I can’t pay attention to Z8/9s. Add in the cost of lenses and it heads north at quite a lick. Over at Sony, they’ve got Samyang making some great budget lenses (like the 135/f1.8) …
Jean-Daniel Pellet
September 19, 2023 2:38 pm
I’m kind of puzzled by the stars in you overall rating chart… :-)
Strange! Thank you for letting me know. I just fixed it.
Troy Phillips
September 13, 2023 12:37 am
What an amazing lens , sharp super zoom with fast autofocus. It’s light and small I believe for what it is . I have just recently purchased the Nikkor Z 24-120 f/4 S and am really liking it . My plan is to have a Nikon Trio of the Nikon Z 14-24 f/2.8 S , 24-120 I have and this 100-400 S lens . I have so many primes from the F mount days and the Nikkor Z 85 f/1.8S . If Nikon makes a 28mm f/1.2 I’d get that . With the new Nikon Z mount I’m enjoying adapting glass . I’ve been buying m Mount Voigtlander stuff . Then I get the Fotodiox E to Z electronic adapter and it’s working great. Loving my Nikon Z9 for manual focus glass also . All my old Nikon manual focus glass going back to 1960 works great adapted . The Z system manors it super easy to get accurate focus . Love this system and so much looking forward to getting this Nikon Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 lens .
Gabriele Milanesi
August 9, 2023 4:31 pm
Thank you for this detailed review, I really like all of your reviews. Are you going to take a look at the Nikon Z 180-600mm too?
Great! It’s not an S-lens and it’s cheaper than the 100-400mm, so I don’t expect amazing image quality, but damn that max focal length and that focal range… I guess Nikon noticed how popular the Tamron/Sigma 150-600mm for F mount were and decided to make their own version for the Z!
Well I have to correct myself… When I commented I only knew the name of the lens and assumed that such a wide focal range couldn’t go together with great image quality, but after taking a look at the early reviews, everyone’s praising the new 180-600! Can’t wait to see your review too.
ilanifer
May 29, 2023 12:29 am
Hi, I consider replacing my 500mm PF with this lens. Is it a good move or is the 500 PF better anyway? As a wildlife photographer I suppose I will be using the lens mostly at 400 mm – it’s weakest range and I’d probably use a 1.4 teleconverter all the time.. is it for me ?
It sounds like for your needs, you should just go with the Z 400mm f/4.5 instead. You get 2/3 stop more light, and it pairs better with the Z teleconverters compared to the 100-400mm. (The 100-400mm is already at f/8 with the 1.4x TC, which is not a great maximum aperture for any low-light or even medium-light wildlife photography.)
Between the 400mm f/4.5 versus the F-mount 500mm f/5.6, it’s pretty much a tossup. I would normally suggest the 400mm f/4.5 because it’s such a strong performer at 400mm. But if you’re not exaggerating and you always/nearly always plan to use the 1.4x TC, you could just as well go with the 500mm f/5.6.
All of this assumes that you mainly plan to use the lens at its longest focal length while also using the teleconverter. If you need the 100-399mm range, you know which lens is better :)
Thank you !!! You have touched all the points of concern and clarified them. I’ll stick to my 500 PF and if an opportunity will come , I’ll take it. No need to rush. Thanks.
Jerry Z.
May 23, 2023 11:17 am
In your opinion how does this with the TCs stack up against older lenses like the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary (NOT Sport), especially on the long end? I know they’re made with two very different goals in mind – the Sigma is meant as a budget model and there are also sacrifices to be made when making a superzoom – but with the dropoff in quality presented by the TCs I would guess they might end up having similar levels of image quality around the 600 mark. Comparing the MTF data suggests similar quality but given that they were tested years apart and with different cameras I’m not reading too much into it.
The easier answer here would be to wait for the Z 200-600 to come out but who knows if Nikon will actually release that this year like their roadmap has suggested…
Having not tested the Sigma 150-600mm in the lab myself, all I can give you are my impressions based on our review from years ago. I expect that the Z 100-400mm + 1.4x TC will perform about the same as the Sigma 150-600mm in terms of sharpness at the long end. However, the Sigma has the advantage of maximum aperture, being an f/6.3 on the long end (2/3 stop brighter than the 100-400mm + 1.4x TC on the long end).
Either way, the 200-600mm should be coming out relatively soon – should be this year. I recommend waiting if performance at 600mm is important to you.
Richard Wanbon
April 18, 2023 2:01 am
I absolutely love this lens! For travel, I leave the 70-200 behind and love how this lens gives me macro, the full focal range and a comparable to the 200-500 all in one. The cost was a gulp but it’s quickly become one of my favourite lenses. While I thought most of its usage would be for those landscape peeks and the occasional macro, it does really well with candid portraits too with nice bokeh. Paired with an UWA and a normal zoom, that’s a reasonable travel kit for the versatility it provides.
It’s an awesome lens – very versatile, like you say. Landscapes, macro, portraiture, and of course wildlife photography. It does pretty much everything well.
I read that the teleconvertors available we not compatable with the z 100-400nm.
I’d love to see an updated comparison with the Nikon Z 180-600 and the Tamron 150-500 now available. Those are two compelling options at much lower price points.
So, I own the Z 70-200 f2,8 and the Z 100-400 f4,5-5,6 with the Nikon Z f and Z fc instead of the tc‘s and I feel very fine with that option. However, I really would like a test review, taking this combination into account. From my amateur- perspective, the Z fc makes much more sense, than a tc.
Interesting.
By comparison, my 70-300E and 500/5.6, used, cost me £2,600. That’s quite a bit cheaper than the 100-400 bearing in mind that with a 35mm camera, 400mm doesn’t cut it for wildlife (it’s much smaller in the U.K.) so it really needs a £500 TC. And if one has a mid-range z-mount, it’s only 10mp in dx mode (and Nikon doesn’t make a decent aps-c z-mount camera, nor does it look like it will). I don’t fancy 560mm at f8.
The only z-mount that would make sense is a 33mp £2,500 (max) Z6iii. That could take a 24-70/120/200, 70-180/f2.8 and 400/f4.5 and 1.4TC, and give 14mp in dx mode. Looks good. But it’s a whopping £8,200.
That’s why I can’t pay attention to Z8/9s. Add in the cost of lenses and it heads north at quite a lick.
Over at Sony, they’ve got Samyang making some great budget lenses (like the 135/f1.8) …
I’m kind of puzzled by the stars in you overall rating chart… :-)
Strange! Thank you for letting me know. I just fixed it.
What an amazing lens , sharp super zoom with fast autofocus. It’s light and small I believe for what it is .
I have just recently purchased the Nikkor Z 24-120 f/4 S and am really liking it .
My plan is to have a Nikon Trio of the Nikon Z 14-24 f/2.8 S , 24-120 I have and this 100-400 S lens . I have so many primes from the F mount days and the Nikkor Z 85 f/1.8S . If Nikon makes a 28mm f/1.2 I’d get that .
With the new Nikon Z mount I’m enjoying adapting glass . I’ve been buying m Mount Voigtlander stuff . Then I get the Fotodiox E to Z electronic adapter and it’s working great. Loving my Nikon Z9 for manual focus glass also . All my old Nikon manual focus glass going back to 1960 works great adapted . The Z system manors it super easy to get accurate focus .
Love this system and so much looking forward to getting this Nikon Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 lens .
Thank you for this detailed review, I really like all of your reviews. Are you going to take a look at the Nikon Z 180-600mm too?
You bet! I already have a copy on order, but it hasn’t shipped quite yet.
Great! It’s not an S-lens and it’s cheaper than the 100-400mm, so I don’t expect amazing image quality, but damn that max focal length and that focal range… I guess Nikon noticed how popular the Tamron/Sigma 150-600mm for F mount were and decided to make their own version for the Z!
Well I have to correct myself… When I commented I only knew the name of the lens and assumed that such a wide focal range couldn’t go together with great image quality, but after taking a look at the early reviews, everyone’s praising the new 180-600! Can’t wait to see your review too.
Hi, I consider replacing my 500mm PF with this lens. Is it a good move or is the 500 PF better anyway?
As a wildlife photographer I suppose I will be using the lens mostly at 400 mm – it’s weakest range and I’d probably use a 1.4 teleconverter all the time.. is it for me ?
It sounds like for your needs, you should just go with the Z 400mm f/4.5 instead. You get 2/3 stop more light, and it pairs better with the Z teleconverters compared to the 100-400mm. (The 100-400mm is already at f/8 with the 1.4x TC, which is not a great maximum aperture for any low-light or even medium-light wildlife photography.)
Between the 400mm f/4.5 versus the F-mount 500mm f/5.6, it’s pretty much a tossup. I would normally suggest the 400mm f/4.5 because it’s such a strong performer at 400mm. But if you’re not exaggerating and you always/nearly always plan to use the 1.4x TC, you could just as well go with the 500mm f/5.6.
All of this assumes that you mainly plan to use the lens at its longest focal length while also using the teleconverter. If you need the 100-399mm range, you know which lens is better :)
Thank you !!! You have touched all the points of concern and clarified them.
I’ll stick to my 500 PF and if an opportunity will come , I’ll take it. No need to rush.
Thanks.
In your opinion how does this with the TCs stack up against older lenses like the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary (NOT Sport), especially on the long end? I know they’re made with two very different goals in mind – the Sigma is meant as a budget model and there are also sacrifices to be made when making a superzoom – but with the dropoff in quality presented by the TCs I would guess they might end up having similar levels of image quality around the 600 mark. Comparing the MTF data suggests similar quality but given that they were tested years apart and with different cameras I’m not reading too much into it.
The easier answer here would be to wait for the Z 200-600 to come out but who knows if Nikon will actually release that this year like their roadmap has suggested…
Having not tested the Sigma 150-600mm in the lab myself, all I can give you are my impressions based on our review from years ago. I expect that the Z 100-400mm + 1.4x TC will perform about the same as the Sigma 150-600mm in terms of sharpness at the long end. However, the Sigma has the advantage of maximum aperture, being an f/6.3 on the long end (2/3 stop brighter than the 100-400mm + 1.4x TC on the long end).
Either way, the 200-600mm should be coming out relatively soon – should be this year. I recommend waiting if performance at 600mm is important to you.
I absolutely love this lens! For travel, I leave the 70-200 behind and love how this lens gives me macro, the full focal range and a comparable to the 200-500 all in one. The cost was a gulp but it’s quickly become one of my favourite lenses. While I thought most of its usage would be for those landscape peeks and the occasional macro, it does really well with candid portraits too with nice bokeh. Paired with an UWA and a normal zoom, that’s a reasonable travel kit for the versatility it provides.
It’s an awesome lens – very versatile, like you say. Landscapes, macro, portraiture, and of course wildlife photography. It does pretty much everything well.