First impressions
This is a small and compact design, considering we are talking about a 400mm lens on a FX body. It is also light for such a complex design which comprises of 17 elements, so handholding this compact long reach telephoto-zoom is not that painful, though I am of a large build, so I personally find no trouble carrying this lens when birding, though it will cause fatigue quite quickly especially when combined with a pro body which is recommended for balancing reasons and better AF performance. So it’s not big and heavy like the faster telephoto lenses (300mm f/2.8) but rather small and light similar to the AF 80-200mm f/2.8D. Plus we shouldn’t forget that this zoom is equivalent to a 120-600mm focal length on a DX format body.

Optical performance
The optical performance is great. Its sharp with hardly any noticeable distortion or flare and I don’t think you can find many zooms that would let you shoot against the sun with such performance, well maybe the last incarnation of the AF 80-200mm can. On the subject of flaring, if you are getting flare with your copy, I would suggest you clean your lens and remove any unnecessary filters from the front of it.

VR technology
Most people are shooting wildlife with this lens, so VR is of little help, though a welcome addition. As mentioned before, VR is designed to compensate for camera movement. As such, it can not stabilize a moving subject. People need to understand this. Don’t be naïve and think that VR will produce sharp results on its own.

The best way to get the most out of this lens is to forget about its VR capabilities. You are shooting at 400mm (600mm on DX) and so should be trying to maximize your yield by aiming for the highest shutter speeds possible. Let VR work in the background, and it will do its part. Some inexperienced photographers, buy this lens and expect to be shooting birds handheld with shutter speeds of 1/60 sec. forget it!

If you want sharp results, you need to “continue” using long lens techniques, support yourself and camera as much as possible, aim for the highest speeds and just let the VR technology do its thing. This lens requires that you shoot 5-6 frames in succession so you can pick the best result. Some are usually soft or blurred looking, but then in the series you will find one or two that really pop. I often also vary my focus so as long as my subject permits, I fire off 5-6 frames and then refocus and shoot again. Although I have some very sharp results at some insanely slow shutter speeds, I usually try to stick with speeds of 1/200sec or faster on my D200. With a DX body the old rule of thumb says that a shutter close to 1/600sec is needed to get a chance at sharp results. Thankfully, most of the times, I end up with more sharp results to choose from and less to throw out.

Autofocusing
OK, up until now I haven’t really pointed out any of its negative points. One of those is its AF speed and AF acquisition. These are the biggest negative points of this lens though they can be overcome with a little finesse.

The lens reminds me of my beloved AF 80-200mm which was also a slow focusing lens. Not only are they both screwdriver type lenses, but the amount of travel that the mechanism has to traverse compared to other lenses, is of a quadruple measure. Nikon is forced to use low gearing so as to be able to move the heavy optics involved in this design. Hopefully, they will come up with a new design which will entail the movement of less glass, so as to release this zoom range with an AFS mechanism.

So the 80-400mm is a slow focusing lens. And having a slow aperture of f/5.6 @ 400mm doesn’t help much either when it comes to focusing accurately on the chosen subject. When you read the various post about softness, most of them really are referring to out-of-focus results which they interpret as unsharp. You need to secure a well focused subject before you can comment on sharpness, and quite often this lens will focus, stop and under closer inspection reveal an OOF image. This is why I tend to refocus often between bursts, in an attempt to increase my chances at getting a properly focused shot. Sometimes, I will even resort to manual focusing.  

There are ways to improve its AF capabilities. One is to pre-focus so the AF will have less distance to travel and another is to use the focus range limiter switch. I am a bit puzzled as to why the limiting range is from 2.3m to just under 4 and then from 5 to infinity. I would have preferred an overlap such as 2.3m to 10m and from 7m to infinity.

Of course, another way to improve AF, is with the use of a pro body. Pro-calibre cameras such as the F5 and the D series offer greater torque from their AF motors compared to their smaller brothers like the Dx00 series cameras, so the autofocusing on the pro cameras can be expected to perform better and faster.

Cruising at 60kph
Nikon D200 & VR 80-400mm F/4,5-5,6D @ 400mm AF-C, f/8 @ 1/320s,  ISO 250

From about 10 frames, in all focus was close and most were usable but only the last 3 were really good. This series doesn’t prove that this lens is good for sports. Its not! But it can under certain circumstances do action when needed. If you want a sports/action lens, look elsewhere.

This is the cleanest shot of that series. The rest aren’t that far from it.

With this lens, there is no need to switch from one of the AF modes to MF on the body. To quickly change from AF to MF and back again you can use the updated Auto/Manual focus mode switch which quite surprisingly worked better than I originally thought. It can be moved quite easily (once you get used to it) with the hand supporting the camera and there is no need to lock the selection unless you want to. It’s no comparison to the AFS solutions, but at least you have that option, even though it’s a dated design.

As we have already seen, the optics that needs to be moved for AF are heavy and that’s one of the reasons of its slow AF performance. The same issue applies to zooming, which also requires the movement of a lot of glass, so it requires some muscle to turn the zoom ring which can be frightening at first if you are used to a small zoom like the AFS 24-120mm.

An issue I had with my copy is that the AF mechanism within the lens seems at times to couple with the zoom ring. This is quite annoying and I usually come across it when supporting my lens with my left hand (tripod collar removed).

On a lighter note, one accessory that can complement this lens (and the AFS 300mm f/4 as well), is the Canon close-up 500D filter. This looks like a regular screw on filter, but is of a high quality two lens design that helps to reduce the minimum focus distance. Although the lens can shoot some remarkable close-ups, with the addition of the 500D, those butterflies really jump of the page.  

Summary

If you are not happy with your results, remember to use the fastest shutter speeds possible and double-check the focusing accuracy. The important thing to remember is that this lens can deliver some excellent results, though it may require extra work from the photographer and some extra light as well. But thankfully it’s not as bad as shooting with an old MF lens. It does offer AF, though a bit slow, it does offer a quick manual focus override (sort of), it has VR (first generation), and carries some great optics with some very smooth bokeh all packaged in a well built casing.  

The AF 80-400mm VR is not an action lens; it’s a nature-trekking lens.

Happy shooting!

PS: You can find more info on my blog at  http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/

Tell us about your experiences with this lens.

Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

October 23, 2007, 04:18:25 PM by Dallas

If you have used this lens please let others know your thoughts by posting about your experiences in this thread.

Please keep your comments in line with the guidelines for this board. OT comments will be removed without notice.

Write Comment

:

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

1: December 10, 2007, 08:07:36 PM by davepaterson

I find this a difficult lens to use successfully, especially towards 400mm. This may well be (© Bjørn) at least partly due to the weak and flexible tripod mounting, but I can't swear to that. I've tried it on the tripod with VR off and everything locked; on the tripod with VR on and everything left loose; and on a bean-bag with VR on and off. Nothing seems to guarantee success, though sharpness is there if you can get everything just right. It's a lot easier towards the 80mm end, of course, but that's not why we have long zooms; we have long zooms to use them LONG.

Maybe I just need more practise; I'm a wide-angle man, really.

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

2: December 22, 2007, 07:34:46 PM by Tom

See my review at Camera Labs: http://www.cameralabs.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1107
Resume: clearly sharper  than the 3rd-partxy lenses I tested it against, but the rest is so outdated
Nikon needs to update this with proper AF/MF-switching and the latest VRII(I)!
Pronto!

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

3: December 22, 2007, 07:56:02 PM by Tom

Ok, I 'fess up: I had not read Dallas' sticky post first! So here are my answers to Dallas' Qs:
How long have you used the item? 1 week!
What did you specifically buy it for? I wanted something with long reach without making me change lenses all the time. It also should work with a future FX-body. I was looking for sharpness, contrast and good IS and perhaps (if possible) a magnification below 1:5.
Has the lens lived up to your expectations? Only in the sharpness/contrast-department. VR + AF/MF-switch were outdated. Focussing was slooow.
Would you recommend the item to others? Nope! I gave the lens back and am eagerly awaiting the revised version coming soon ...

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

4: December 31, 2007, 03:53:35 PM by PaulDRobertson

I've had this lens since just after it came out.  I bought it to shoot wildlife, mostly birds.  I got a fairly good deal on a used sample at a local camera store.  I shot a lot with the lens when I first got it because it had 100mm more reach than the 300/4 I was shooting with at the time.  The lens isn't as sharp as competitive lenses from other manufacturers.  It has nice contrast and is capable of salable images, but it's not as sharp at 400mm as my copy of the Sigma 50-500mm is at 500mm.  It hunts less on a D2x than it does on an S2Pro or D70s.  The D2's stronger focus motor makes it more usable too.  I almost always shoot long glass off a tripod, so I'm talking sharpness under ideal conditions.

I don't recommend this lens, as I feel the sharpness is sub-par for a Nikkor, and for less money the Sigma 50-500 is clearly superior in reach and sharpness though not contrast.

Paul

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

5: January 27, 2008, 10:57:23 PM by MJR

I bought this lens new in Jan 01 and still have it. I think the VR in this lens is the best of all Nikon VR lenses. I have them all except the 200-400 which I have shot with. I bought this lens with handholding in mind and do not use it on a pod so the reported collar limitations have not affected me. One thing I believe that has not been mentioned is the lag time it takes for the VR to activate. A lot of shooters in the heat of the moment do not allow the time for the VR to activate and as a result get OOF or unsharp images. As Dallas pointed out 2 other things are needed to get the best performance from this lens. One is use the limit focus when you can. This will cut down on hunting. Second prefocus help quite a bit. What I do is after every shooting sequence, refocus on infinity for the next sequence. You can see your subject better and place the focus point on it. I deactivate the shutter focus and use the AF button for focus acquisition. Just prior to shooting I activate VR with the shutter and seeing the VR settling down I then shoot. I refined this technique shooting Air Shows. Never missed a shot this way. I also shoot Birds and for BIF I would only use this lens for large slow birds like Pelicans. Smaller faster birds will drive you crazy trying to use this lens. After trying this with Birds, Jets seem to move slowly. I think the image quality is fine with this lens if you have proper focus and exposure. As Dallas also pointed out the focus ring is stiff. When I first got this lens I checked out a lot of lenses from other shooters 80-400 and all seem to be too stiff. I know this is because a lot of glass has to be moved, still it would be nice to be able to move it with one finger or thumb without taking your hand away while handholding. This lens is fairly compact and makes a versatile travel lens. Would I recommend this lens..yes if one is willing to learn how to use it getting around its "limitations", otherwise if you think you shouldn't have to get around the limitations then no.

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

6: January 29, 2008, 09:07:04 PM by PaulDRobertson

Quote from: MJR on January 27, 2008, 10:57:23 PM

I bought this lens new in Jan 01 and still have it. I think the VR in this lens is the best of all Nikon VR lenses. I have them all except the

You are aware this is the first generation VR from Nikon, and they're not likely to use the first generation ever again.  Most people find it not the best VR they've experienced, so your preference is interesting.

Quote from: MJR on January 27, 2008, 10:57:23 PM

One thing I believe that has not been mentioned is the lag time it takes for the VR to activate. A lot of shooters in the heat of the moment do not allow the time for the VR to activate and as a result get OOF or unsharp images.

The lens will be at its sharpest with VR off on a stable tripod.  With VR off, locked down on a tripod that easily handles my 400mm f/2.8 AFS-II it lacks critical sharpness.

In those conditions, it simply isn't nearly as sharp at 400mm as the Sigma 50-500mm lens is at 500mm.  You can compare the MTF charts from both manufacturers to verify this and you will see that the 80-400 simply doesn't perform exceptionally well at 400mm.  It's not a bad lens, it simply isn't a great lens.  Since those lenses are both from the same era, many bird and airshow shooters on budgets had one or both and compared them- and the Nikkor always lost.

When I talk about limitations in quality, they're simply not things you can "work around-" because they're inherent in the physics and the optical design of the lens.  For a pro-sumer Nikkor, this lens is sub-par at 400mm, and that's a pity because most of us would use the lens out at 400mm most of the time.

Paul

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

7: February 04, 2008, 12:33:13 AM by Murph

I have a love hate relationship with this lens.  My problem is I compare it to the 70-200mm VR, and its nowhere in that class. 

My 80-400 VR evaluation

8: February 08, 2008, 10:55:31 PM by Derrel

I bought mine in the fall of 2002 and have used it on D1-D1h-D2x and S2 Pro and Nikon D70 bodies. Autofocus on the consumer-level S2 and D70 AF modules is not very reliable or especially fast. The max aperture is slow and the lower-tech bodies do not drive the lens with the authority/surety of the pro bodies. The D2x handles this lens reasonably well. The VR system is good in this lens and with practice it's able to stabilize the lens racked all the way out at slow speeds like 1/20 to 1/40 second zones with good technique on the shooter's part. The image is a bit jumpier than the 70-200 or the 200/2 VR's new Gen II VR,but the lens has been used aboard small boats and for some shooting from a car going 55-65 MPH on freeways, and this VR is quite good. It's nothing to sneer at. It has two modes of VR,and I use the forward-most position at all times. Using the limiter keeps the focus from 15 feet to Infinity,and it helps somewhat, but this lens can get,well 'confused' quite easily. I have owned the 70-200 VR since its premier,and the 200/VR since early 2006 and feel that the VR of the old stovepipe is quite good--the maligning of the 1st Gen VR in the 80-400 is undeserved. Shoot it aboard a boat or train--the VR's quite good for what it was meant for.

The lockable and non-lockable M-A switch was,AFAIK, premiered on the 80-400VR. With this switch,you are not required to LOCK into either the M or into A focus, but can set the switch to allow button-free switching between M and A modes,and you'll usually,but not always, want to set the lens to that mode, so you can shift between MF and AF without need of pressing the small chrome release button in order to turn the selector ring. Alternately, I sometimes lock it to Manual-Only focusing. This lens's focusing slicks up after a couple years of heavy use. The focusing is GOOD in manual focusing mode,throughout much of the range,and the pitch of the focusing is not so hair-trigger that you get a lot of mis-focusing when focusing by hand. It has a lot of marked focusing distances,with Infinity, 40 ft,20 ft, 15 ft, 12 ft, 10 ft, 9 ft, 8 ft all separated by a goodly number of degrees. This lens is very usable in manual focusing mode between 40 feet and 8 feet with repeatable manual focus,in decent light. In good light, it's easy to manually focus this lens,especially at longer FL's.

For stadium use like on American football played during the daylight hours,with the AF action far away and without much change in distance, this lens is good.But on the sidelines, where focus range shifts with each snap of the ball, this lens is horrible. For soccer at field level,it is usable,but frustrating and limiting. In a boat on ocean or big lake, this lens is a good performer due to VR stabilizing pretty much better than ANY non-VR lens. You can do some pseudo-macro with it using a Canon 500D filter or a Kenko 20mm extension tube and the expansive zoom range to shoot hand-held small scenes at botanical gardens,etc,with VR and autofocus and ttl flash and all that. I've shot the Sigma 80-400 OS on a D200 a little bit; the Sigma is a much better AF lens in terms of AF,and handling and design. The 80-400 demands a D1 or D2 camera for fast-action sports like soccer, where it is only marginally competent. It has good reach,for when you are confined to one location,and need stabilization. It's not super-sharp above 340mm or so, but it is a "real" 400mm. Its best use is when you need VR,like in a boat,or when you're huffing and puffing a bit but still need long-range views. If you need to stand in ONE place, like at a zoo railing, or a botanical garden,or are stuck in a stadium seat or aboard a train or boat, you have a long range zoom and VR. Going whale-watching? Going salmon fishing? VR is a huge bonus there,aboard watercraft on ocean swells. It's kind of clunky,but it is useful for when you need just one,long zoom and when stabilization can make a difference. For scenic type shots,or when you want to isolate things at quite some distance,and when AF speed and AF sureness is not a make or break deal, this lens is useful. If you can manually focus well, that is a plus with the 80-400. I often pre-establish the general focus in MF, and then nudge the ring into AF. I think the VR works better with AF system engaged. NO doubt the 80-400's AF performance is sub-optimal on D70-type bodies.

This lens demands a pro-grade AF system to be called "good" at AF. It has a lot of AF quirks and limitations,and you need to understand its area is slow-speed,small-f/stop work,where focus stays in one zone, OR when you need VR to counteract wind or boat/car motion. At some windsurfing places for example,and at many salmon fishing places, the LENS's sharpness isn't all that critical, but VR can be a huge boost to counteract all the inherent instability of the shooting platform. Used ones cost $900-$950, the Sigma 80-400 is priced similarly,and my initial try of the Sigma was BIF on ospreys,and I felt that the Sigma focused a lot more surely, and just better, on a D200 than the 80-400 could do. I've shot 30,000 frames + on the 80-400 over five full years,on multiple bodies. It has its place. It's quirky. It's long. It's portable. It will work with Kenko AF tubes. It's got VR,and many times VR is far,far more important than optical sharpness,which is overrated sometimes.

Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED with a D3

9: May 02, 2008, 07:02:58 AM by JayKay

I used this lens with a D70 initially. The focusing was so-so. I then tried it on a friend's D2X and was impressed with the improvement. It seemed to lock on much faster. My next camera was the D200 (could not afford the D2X). Tracking seemed to have improved as did focusing when I added the battery grip to the D200. Not as good as the D2X though.

I now have both the D300 and D3 and can see very little difference between the two when using the 80-400VR apart from the crop factor. Does this mean that the D3 and D300 have the same motor? The D3 does not seem to have as much 'grip' on the lens as the D2X had.

Strangely enough, I find that the D50 and the 80-400VR work very well together. It is a bit slow, but the images are great.

Re: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D VR ED

10: October 28, 2009, 12:26:19 PM by gnurk

I know this is old but I think this lens has been flamed at too much. I  must own the best specimen ever made, reading all the reviews around on the net.

Even at 400mm my lens is a good performer, but it tops just below that. It has brilliant sharpness and saturation. I am extremely critical on sharpness, using a fixed focus 500 for long-lens nature photography and being spoilt by splendid lenses such as the 200mm micro, but this lens has given me most bang for the buck on assignment, particularly shooting events where it is a fantastic lens for shooting portraits (across long distances) of people who are unaware that they are beoing photographed, and travelling, where it can replace a hell of a lot of glass. (I only take a a D300 plus backup, a 17-55, my 80-400, a 105mm micro and a 50mm 1.4 when shooting travel assignments).

Yes, the slow AF is annoying and birds in flight are not an option, but any attacks on this lens should focus on just that. The rest works, the range is lovely, the portability very good, it's as unobtrusive as a lens of this calibre can get, and image quality is - I'm sorry - brilliant. Where it wasn't, I have always been able to trace back my steps and found out what I had done wrong. I have many tack sharp shots taken at 400mm (600mm on a D300) hand-held (!!!) to prove it.