Superzooms have always been viewed with a certain amount of disdain by “serious” photographers. Fairly or unfairly, lots of photographers would immediately dismiss anything more extreme than a 24-120mm lens. But now, Nikon has released not a superzoom, but a straight hyperzoom, whose wide end starts at 28mm and ends at 400mm: the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR. How big is the optical compromise in a 14.3x zoom? Is this record-breaking lens just a marketing ploy to lure customers? To answer these questions, there was nothing to do but to take the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR out and test it for myself.
I have to admit that I’m one of those photographers who are a little wary of superzooms. What are my reasons? The first thing that comes to mind is sharpness, which is not usually their strong point compared to their more modest counterparts. Another reason is the narrow maximum aperture. In the case of the 28-400mm, it’s f/8 at the long end, which is a record low among modern Nikon lenses. A narrow aperture means less room for depth-of-field control and, of course, forces us to use a higher ISO. Moreover, image quality on superzooms also tends to suffer where bokeh, vignetting, flare, and other optical vices are concerned.
Competition
Before I try to confirm or refute some of my concerns with the 28-400mm f/4-8, let’s take a look at the alternatives to this lens. Among Nikon’s full-frame lenses, the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR for F-mount held the record until now. There is also the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR. These two lenses aren’t perfect, however. The 28-300mm is not an especially sharp lens, and the 24-200mm – though an improvement – is still one of the weaker Nikon Z lenses optically.
However, both of these lenses are brighter than the new 28-400mm f/4-8. A maximum aperture of f/8 on the long end is really quite dim, and what’s more, the 28-400mm f/4-8 is already confined to f/8 starting at 200mm. Even so, the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR still looks the most interesting on paper of the three, at least to me, thanks to the extraordinary range.
What about the competition from other brands? Some recent examples include the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM, Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS, Tamron 28-200mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III RXD and, most recently, the Panasonic Lumix S 28-200mm f/4-7.1 MACRO O.I.S. However, none of them even reach 300mm, let alone 400mm. The Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 really is unique among superzooms today.
Build Quality and Handling
For a standard zoom, this is one of the bigger options in Nikon’s lineup. It weighs 725 grams (1.6 pounds) and measures 14cm long (5.6 inches). Of course, no one expects a pancake form factor from a 14.3x superzoom. To put it another way, if you use this one lens instead of carrying two or three others, you’d save enough room to put a lunchbox in your backpack.
Like all superzooms that I know of, the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 extends as you zoom in. At 400mm, it’s about 25 cm long (9.8 inches). To prevent unintentional extension during transport, the lens can be locked at 28mm.
I have to praise that the barrel parts are made and assembled accurately, with very little wobble even with the dual telescoping barrel extended, at least on my copy. You don’t have to worry about the lens bending like a fishing rod under the bite of a swordfish at 400mm.
The Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 has a standard 77mm filter thread on the front. What isn’t standard is the shape of the lens hood. Nikon chose a fairly wide rectangle that is going to be most effective at 28mm, but still better than a circular shape at the longer focal lengths.
Image Quality
What about the photos that you can take with the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8? Because of the wide range of focal lengths, it has some promise for everything from landscape photography to wildlife photography. Although the maximum aperture of f/8 on the long end does limit the lighting conditions for fast-moving wildlife.
For this reason, I took the lens to a place where it had a chance to shine, even with such a dark aperture: a nesting colony of herons on a sun-drenched rock slope in Prague’s Troja.
My first impression was how much reach I was getting for such a small lens. I’m used to 400mm lenses weighing a lot more than this and taking up much more space. The difference between the 28mm and 400mm focal lengths is really, really huge.
Here’s another example:
My second impression of the lens was that despite the slow aperture, the lens focused quite quickly. Though, I was testing it on the Nikon Z9 to give it the best possible shot at fast autofocus. (Our full review will include tests from the Nikon Zf and the original Z6 for further context on this issue.)
I found that a relatively slow-flying heron was not much of a challenge for the 28-400mm f/4-8, as long as you use it on a camera that can keep up. However, occasionally the lens would focus on the wing instead of the head. Also, during feeding shots, the lens was sometimes a little hesitant about what to focus on. I blame this on the maximum aperture of f/8, which gives the camera less light to work with (and too much depth of field to place easily and accurately).
What about the optical performance? Until we have lab tests for you, here are my few observations. To give you a better idea of the lens’ performance, I compared it to the trusty and popular Nikon Z 24-120 f/4. This is considered a very high-quality, versatile lens and one of the best zooms for the Nikon Z system. I expected a clear dominance of the shorter zoom over the superzoom, but I was quite surprised by the result.
At 28mm, it is hard for my eye to tell which lens is sharper. Judge for yourself by looking at the full photo and then at the 100% crops.
The Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S is a little sharper there, especially in the corners, but not by an extraordinary amount. 28mm is definitely a sweet spot for the Z 28-400mm f/4-8.
What about as you zoom in? At 120mm, the differences are more noticeable. The 24-120mm f/4 S is both sharper and has more contrast.
With the 24-120mm, the 120mm is the end station. In the case of the ultra-zoom, however, it’s not even a third of its range! So let’s turn the zoom ring all the way up.
The end of the zoom range is often the Achilles’ heel of zooms (not only the “super” ones). In the case of the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8, I noticed a fairly pronounced chromatic aberration at 400mm, definitely more than at the shorter focal lengths. Here is an uncropped image, followed by an uncorrected crop to show what I mean.
The last thing I’d like to focus on is the quality of the bokeh. While I still need to test the lens more for its bokeh capabilities, the photos that I got still tell an interesting story.
One of the most obvious limitations of the narrow maximum aperture is the large depth of field. It gives you less ability to separate the subject from the background, even compared to an f/5.6 lens (like the Nikon Z 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6) but especially an f/4.5 lens or wider. And you can see that in some of the wildlife photos in this article.
While the background is still blurred in these photos, it is not nearly as far out of focus as it would be with a Nikon Z 400mm f/4.5, for example. Only the last photo has as much out-of-focus blur as I would want, and that’s because the background was quite far away, and the subject was a little closer to me.
However, subject separation is one thing, and the quality of the bokeh itself is another. As long as there are no specular highlights in the background, I have no big objections with the bokeh of the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8. Where the sky shines through the trees, I like the bokeh a little less. For my taste, the specular highlights have a somewhat pronounced edges and an internal texture reminiscent of fish scales. In addition, their shape towards the edges of the frame creates cat’s eyes. You can see all that in these crops:
Conclusion
The Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR is a unique lens. It’s hard to compare it to anything else, because no other full-frame zoom has such a huge range.
From what I have been able to test, the zoom has exceeded my expectations in terms of image quality. Compared to the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S, it is certainly not as sharp, especially as you zoom in – but I was expecting a superzoom-sized difference between them, and that isn’t what I found. The 28-400mm f/4-8 put in a respectable performance.
The focal lengths at the end of the range, including 400mm, are also far from being a marketing gimmick. If you accept the limitation of the f/8 aperture, the results are not bad at all. There’s some more chromatic aberration, and it’s not as sharp as it was at 28mm, but I consider it to be completely usable. Even the focusing speed is good enough for normal action scenes.
Take a look at the following image, captured at 400mm, plus a 100% crop. Though not at the same level as Nikon’s sharpest lenses, you won’t be able to tell me that this is lousy performance.
So the question remains, who is this lens for? Personally, I see it as a suitable choice wherever you don’t want to carry multiple lenses and need to cover a wide range of different subjects – landscapes, street, wildlife, and so on. It’s going to be a classic choice for travel photography.
Although there are some image quality compromises, the main drawback is the maximum aperture of the lens. As long as you’re comfortable with a maximum aperture of f/8 from 200mm to 400mm, this is an ideal “desert island lens.”
Pricing and Availability
I hope that you found this introduction to the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR to be helpful for some early context! Our full review will be published next month, with extensive sample photos and lab tests. In the meantime, if you are planning to purchase this lens, you can support our lens testing efforts by buying it through our affiliate links below. The lens costs $1300, and the first copies of it are already shipping.
Photography Life gets a small percentage of each purchase made through the links above, even if you buy something other than the Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR, without costing you anything extra.
Our tentative star rating is below, followed by user comments. Let me know if you have any questions about this lens!
Nikon Z 28-400mm f/4-8 VR
- Optical Performance
- Build Quality and Handling
- Value
Photography Life Overall Rating
I have now had the 28-400mm lens for 10 days. I was able to compare it to the 24-120mmf4S, the 70-200mmf2.8S, the 180-600mmf5.6/6/3 and the 400mmf4.5 lenses. Indeed, this lens performs as Libor stated, in regards to the 24-120mmf4S. As to the other lenses, the central areas were remarkably similar. Though the 28-400mm was slightly behind in contrast and acuity, it was not by much. The corners do get softer than Nikon’s premium telephoto lenses (like the ones listed above), but, really, most telephoto images have the subject in the center area not the corners. Nikon software now automatically corrects for distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberrations for this lens, and the flare resistance is quite good.
I travel quite extensively and many of those trips are not of the type where I can easily pack large lenses. And that is real advantage of the 28-400mm lens. It is small, light, and relatively inconspicuous , yet can give really good images at any focal length.
Though the 28-400mm lens is not quite the level of the S line lenses, it is better than most any F mount lens in the area of 28-120mm and on par with many of those lenses up to 300mm.
I find the 28-400mm to be just a lot of fun to use. One’s creativity expands greatly just by having such focal length range. This lens is going to be very, very popular
If users want perfect picture quality at 28mm and 400mm then they need to consider the S series zooms/primes or 400mm primes. That’s not what this lens is about. For photographers who want one versatile lens that never leaves a lighter body camera (Z6/7 or Zf), it seems ideal and the quality of the pictures will well satisfy a lot of users for social media posts etc.
Z8/9 owners are unlikely to be users of this lens – though they could for pure convenience. This intial test well exceeded my expectations.
It could also be a good lens for shooting 4K video on the Z9 or Z8 when sharpness and optical perfection aren’t nearly as noticeable, and yet you still want the video capabilities of those cameras.
Thank you Libor for this review. As sufficient as the 28-400mm may be for some of the use case you have shown, it has served to further reinforce my intention to wait for a Nikkor Z-mount 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 that further improves on the optics of its fairly capable F-mount counterpart.
I understand that the Z-mount Tamron 70-300mm likely indicates that Nikon is not prioritizing a Z-mount 70-300mm but I will patiently wait until Nikon releases its own version. Like the Nikkor 19mm f4E PC, I will continue to use the F-mount 70-300mm AFP f/4.5-5.6E with an FTZ until Nikon releases a Z-mount version.
I was hoping that Nikon would release such a lens. Perfect equipment for mountain photography.
I totally agree. With a lighter body like Z6/7II or Zf it will be a perfect companion for mountain hiking.
Quite good for what it is. The bokeh looks a little swirly in some of these shots, no?
The 28-400mm is definitely not a bokeh king. On the other hand, I was expecting a much worse result in this respect.
Looks promising.
For me, this would be part of a 2 lens, shoulder bag, kit with a 14-30 and Z5 for landscapes, so f8 isn’t much of an issue. It’d fit nicely on my bike rack too.
For wildlife I go for the mid-budget/specialist solution of 300/f4 and 500/f5.6 on a D7500, having been disappointed with the 80-400 and 200-500 used for that subject-matter.
What matters too is price. £1,300 versus £3,800 for a 24-120 and 100-400. That’s pretty much the price gap between a Z5 and Z8. It looks like the 28-400 is closer to the 24-120 and 100-400 than a Z5 is to a Z8.
Budget (and high end) mirrorless is (are) coming along quite nicely. But I don’t think mid-price delivers any better value than f-mount and a DSLR.
This looks like a perfect lens for capturing kids/grandkids outdoor sports, where you can stand on or near the sideline but need to cover the whole field – with no time to change lenses.
I think this lens is made for this kind of task. We will have to test how the zoom will focus on lower bodies and in poor light. However, under optimal conditions, this is a lens that will do a very good job.
I happened to be in my camera store (Toronto, Canada) yesterday and the sales manager had the lens. I picked it up on a Z8 and found the combination worked well and the focussing was fast. What really surprised me was how relatively light it was. As with the other comments, I already have existing lenses. But, this lens would be very useful for travel and casual outdoor sports. Great article once again and very timely.
Thank you very much for the quick and fair assessment of the 28-400.
In the hands of experienced and ambitious photographers, the lens will perform at its best.
A few comments already show the target group: traveling with little luggage and that’s exactly where the lens will feel comfortable and be a good companion.
When it was announced I had just received the 180-600, which replaced my 4/600 FL (last F lens) and the very good 100-400. The 180-600 is a blessing. Sufficiently good resolution and low weight, which becomes more important to me as I get older.
I prefer to shoot from the hip rather than sitting down and am often reluctant (too lazy) to use a tripod. I haven’t been able to break the habit in over 40 years.
As already mentioned in at least one comment here: the 180-600 is a bit cumbersome on bike tours. This is where I expect big things from the 28-400.
And if the image quality isn’t that good, then it’s definitely due to the weather. Because rain and closed cloud cover are more the norm here. :)
I’m expecting the 28-400 next Monday and can’t wait. :)
Thank you for the very complete review. I have particularly appreciated the crop comparisons with a reference objective. I have found them as useful, or even more useful, than Imatest numbers, although I understand that laboratory test are the scientific way to proceed.