JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
The Nikon AF-S 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 G ED VR is a tele lens for FF and APS-C, manufactured from 2013. The focus is done by Ultrasonic AF Motor (Ring-USM), it has image stabilization. The average price, when it has been added to the JuzaPhoto database, is 1946 €;
43 users have given it an average vote of 9.1 out of 10.
MOUNT
This lens is available with the following mounts:
Nikon F: this lens is compatible with reflex fullframe and APS-C Nikon.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 207000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Pros:Discreetly light and short even at 400. Not bad sharpness. Amazing vr
Cons:A little "fat" to gibble with your hand. Glacier zoom and focus reverse -at least according to what I like - fluid zoom but in a bit masculine to be operated compared to for example to the 70 200 vr 1. The lampshade covers the zoom ring when fitted in reverse. New cost
Opinion:At first glance it gives the idea of being stocky but not exaggerated. A little more than 28-70 2.8 but then it is that little more that exceeds the capacity of the hand. I hope to get used to it. It reminds so much of the 'family' of the 24-120 f4 as construction and performance. Optically very good (the 24-120 f4 does not make sense to be so minted, at most it is a less bright thread, but good). Construction a step lighter than the PRO canons, but well done. Smooth I liked right away already doing the AF tuning end. You immediately see it's the sharp ones. A nice spread over the 70-200 vr 1 duplicate and the old AF-D (which were comparable). With the kenko 1.4 300 per dgx goes optically agree but the vr even if working emits strange sounds of anxiety. Probably over 450-500 mm can be worth it especially on sensors that are not too dense. On the d800e probably croppare is not so pejorative and light/ISO gains. With the TC-20E II, on the other hand, the VR works well but you lose the AF at about 150mm depending on the contrast. The sharpness plummets enough. I also do not want to do this because with f11 the ISO skyrocket and the possible advantage is thwarted by noise. However with a greater use I will be able to add some more information . PS I bought used guaranteed 1 year at 1150 (which does not seem bad) and compared to the 500/600 of a used vr 1 is worth them all. The only one mole is larger. The construction of the vr1 looked more PRO as all the optics of the era. Another little note. being the lampshade quite large, if "parked" in reverse, completely covers a dial. zoom (as reversed) and therefore for a shot on the fly you need to remove it to operate it.
Pros:Weight, sharpness, very effective stabilizer, colors
Cons:Maybe the price
Opinion:Excellent lens I have for more than a year and I find it beautiful, I sold the Sigma 150/500 because I found it a bit ' heavy to go hunting for photos! Instead the Nikon has half a pound less which is not little kg 1.500 against the 2 kg excellent colors as well as sharpness, excellent stabilizer the price a bit ' expensive, I'm sorry for the friend who has problems with his goal! I highly recommend it!
Pros:Long focal excursion with excellent sharpness at least up to 200 then still remains very good
Cons:stabilization (?) and weight
Opinion:Edit 07/19 new rating much more positive: it is a much better optics than its predecessor (which was not to be discarded) than this has improved in all respects: autofocus much faster, sharpness and blurred better, but bracket for the no easel, that one remains scarce. My relationship with him was one of love and hate: using it on my D800 with and without active VR, it NEVER provided clear images. Much better to use it without VR, and in that case the images were very plastic and sharp. The yield drops a bit to 400mm but still remains very good. On qualified sites there are 'stories' that judge it on a par with 70-200, and in my experience on the D800 I considered it a huge panzana, for me it was just good, not excellent; certainly lower than the AFS 300 f4; I thought it was not suitable to count the feathers of the bird on duty, but very good for sports use. UPDATE June 2019: After some intense comparative tests and field use with the D850, I have to totally think again: at least up to 200mm, from the comparisons, it emerges incredibly that, absolutely, it is the best long focal optics in my possession (always after the AFS 300 f4), at 80mm and all opening f4.5, has a sharpness superior to the same diaphragm compared to all the other zooms I own: among them: sigma 24-105 f4 and nikon afs 80-200 f2.8. A 200mm always TA ranks second immediately behind the AFS 80-200 in a "It's a very sad day," he says, "but I'm not going to say that I'm not going to be able to do that." In fact, given the problems of THE VR on the D800, after the first days of use with the D800 I had sent it back to assistance without any defects. On the D800, with VR active, all the images showed a nice contrast, a nice bokeh but also a visible ghost image (double image) particularly sharp on details such as branches etc... even shooting at 1/4000. This does not happen using it using it on the D7200, where I use it happily for action photos (even with the 1.4x) and disappears completely using it on the D850 where it shows its quality decidedly PRO already at full opening and on all the focal points. In my experience I can say that this optics has a compatibility problem between the D800 machine body and the lens, (a known defect of the D800, although there is no semi-official list of good and 'bad' VR optics); D800, which however worked well with all the rest of my set up kit and also with the previous 80-400 VR AFD. The optics is undoubtedly very recommendable and although new costs an eye, you can find it used at affordable prices. Its overall quality is really great, (the golden ring around the barrel deservedly certifies it), but my suggestion is undoubtedly to try it on your own machine body (with the VR) before formalizing the purchase. Basically: it is an excellent optics that gives the best on medium distances, but is very critical in focus and micromovement; it is perfect using the focus of the D850 liveview, instead requires a precise fine calibration of the autofocus when used with the reflex. I believe that on a mirrorless it can be an essential optics. I vote 9th for resolution, 8 and a half for stabilization.
Opinion:Using this lens for about six months and I'm very satisfied. I was undecided whether to take the new 300 f4 with Fresnel lens or the zoom, after a few months I can say that I made the right choice. Its strength lies in versatility, in a photographic safari outputs ports always shooting at home, as if you have to shoot a robin, a stork or an elephant, you always find the right focus. Given the opportunity the affiancherei at a fixed 500 / 600mm, but it would never give away. I use it mainly freehand without problems, of course on the stand it is a pleasure, especially when stalking where we can have fun with focal lengths, remember in this case to exclude the VR! The defects are inherent in its nature of being a 5x zoom, little light, with a strong focus breathing, the commissioning minimum distance in focus is the real focal length of 243mm. It digests well the multiplier 1,4III, but AF speed is affected, especially if the light conditions are not optimal, so watch out that you can lose shots while the AF search of mect into focus. Compared to zoom less extensive and more bright loses the comparison in terms of sharpness, but still maintains a high quality, even at 400mm, the focal length is used more. Highly recommended
Pros:crisp, well-built, fast, good stabilizer, size
Cons:high price, maybe a little heavy but we know
Opinion:Lens for excellent light output, excellent image quality when used smooth, still good when used with TC14, TC14 better with III, which is sometimes miracles (I would like to see given the cost). The AF is fast and maintains a certain usability even with TC. In short, does his dirty work in many situations. I think the only downside is the price, exaggerated by the type of lens which is (even if it looks like its other brands) .rnMi am still recommend it because the alternatives at par there are not second me.rn
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.
