• NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    Nikon has just released an interesting 28-400, it looks like an interesting hiking lens and nice lightweight lens for small architectural detail shots, when I have a heavy bag of shift lenses.

    BUT, these modern lenses need updated firmware in your camera to function properly. It seems a firmare update is coming from Nikon on the 26th of April for the Z range, which I hope includes my now ancient Z7.

    Would it not be smarter to update the camera firmware first, (without perhaps spilling the new lens beans), and then sell you a lens that needs a certain firmare level to use with the lens.

    I want this lens, but I will have to certain of a firmware update for my camera, before buying

  • 748 posts
    a year ago

    Is it being shipped in Europe? In the USA it is still listed as coming soon.

  • AlanShpanorama_fish_eye
    a year ago

    Or, when they release the lens, have the updated firmware available.

    Alan

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    My local dealer has one. I am in Italy

  • finnanhelp_outline
    322 posts
    a year ago

    HAND.

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    For your information these Z lenses need firmware to work properly on Z cameras and they do not correct distortion or interact with IBIS on cameras without the relevant firmware.

    What I buy is my choice, and I do not have to justify anything I buy to anybody. Whether I have FOMO is my problem, and I am sick of somebody who does not know me or my photography, questioning or denigrating my choices, as it always seems to happen on forums. OK.

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    Update

    It seems no special firmare update is necessary. So I bought this lens.

    I have just shot a few frames off the balcony, and it seems a pretty impressive lens. My Z7 is doing the distortion adjustments, and the IBIS/VR lets me shoot sharp pictures a 1/30 at 400mm.

    Coupled with the 14-30, this looks like a great setup for those times I want to go light.

    From the first few frames, it looks like a lens that has exceeded my expectations, just as the 24-200 did

  • AlanShpanorama_fish_eye
    a year ago

    That's brilliant. Happy snapping.

    Alan

  • edit

    Thread title has been changed from Nikon 28-400 Absent Camera Firmware.

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    Its raining continuously here, so my first test shots were taken from my balcony. I have not cropped or done any PP, apart from a bit of exposure tweaking.

    DSC_1947 1.jpg

    DSC_1912 1.jpg


    Im pretty amazed at this 400mm shot at 1/30 The minimum F8 aperture becomes a bit less limiting

    DSC_1903 1.jpg


    Wide at 28mm

    DSC_1904 1.jpg


    Wide

    DSC_1931 1.jpg

    DSC_1937 2.jpg


    A badly framed brick wall. 28mm. Looks like the in camera corrections are working well.

    I,m a bit schizophrenic with my photography. I love the sharpness, micro contrast and shear pixel peeping image quality of my prime shift lenses, and I wish I could justify the Fuji MF camera with their shift lenses. But for travel hiking and such, the 24-200 and now this 28-400 are my go to tools as the quality really is more than good enough and I have eliminated all the lens changing in the field.

    This is a pretty good practical review of the lens. The image quality is not too far off the well rated 24-120.

    DSC_1903 1.jpg

    JPG, 818.2 KB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

    DSC_1937 2.jpg

    JPG, 1.8 MB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

    DSC_1931 1.jpg

    JPG, 707.8 KB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

    DSC_1904 1.jpg

    JPG, 899.9 KB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

    DSC_1912 1.jpg

    JPG, 1.0 MB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

    DSC_1947 1.jpg

    JPG, 658.1 KB, uploaded by NCV a year ago.

  • finnanhelp_outline
    322 posts
    a year ago

    HAND.

  • AlanShpanorama_fish_eye
    a year ago

    So it's been reduced to make it faster to upload and review.

  • finnanhelp_outline
    322 posts
    a year ago

    HAND.

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    They are Raw images converted in Capture 1 to JPEG for online use. Anybody who is interested can have a full size RAW or JPEG by Dropbox, if they PM me.

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    Follow the link in my post and you can see some professionally done small crop samples.

    Otherwise, just take my word for the fact this lens is pretty amazing for a superzoom.

    The only other zoom with this range is the Olympus 14-200 which is a pretty poor lens by all accounts.

  • finnanhelp_outline
    322 posts
    a year ago

    HAND.

  • bobn2panorama_fish_eye
    a year ago

    I think these comparisons are a little off the point anyway. I use both mFT (mostly Panasonic) and FF (mostly Nikon). I use each system for it merits, so if I wanted a 'walk around' solution, I'd only be using FF if I wanted a 'walk around/ low light' solution, in which case I'd be using it with a fast prime. For all the other 'walk around' use cases I would use mFT, and then I probably wouldn't use a superzoom, because I can keep a three-lens mFT outfit in a really small pouch. The superzoom lens is really most applicable to FF when you want to avoid carrying multiple lenses. Even then, the Canon and Nikon systems offer an 'interchangeable bodies' strategy, where you can carry a body which is more compact than most lenses and gives an alternate framing, and more pixel density if you're using the lower resolution FF options (or on Canon, any FF body, the R7 gives the same pixel density as 80MP on FF)

  • NCVpanorama_fish_eye
    2039 posts
    a year ago

    A big advantage of the "superzoom" for me is that I can avoid lots of lens changes, when I am hiking. In fact I bought the 24-200 for hiking, thinking it would be an OK lens to record my walks in the mountains. I was not too worried about image quality. Previously, I used two EM5 bodies with the Panasonic 12-35 and 35-100. Both excellent lenses, but I found that the body with the 35-100 just remained in my rucksack, as it is not a quick process to stop and dig out the other lens. The 24-200 fixed the problem. My other choice at the time was the Olympus 12-100, but other factors convinced me to slim down to just Nikon.

    Mountains are generally windy and sensor dust is always a danger. The 400mm end will be good as I find a long telephoto, in the mountains is often more useful than wide angle.

    A good case for these lenses can be made for those trips out with the family, where lens changing elicits groans. I just usually carry one body with the 24-200 slung over my shoulder for these occasions.

    Another reason I got this lens, was that I wanted a lightweight long lens for architectural detail shots. 200 is a bit short. The VR/IBIS seems to very good, which means it will work fine on my Monopod system, that I use when using a tripod is not possible.

  • bobn2panorama_fish_eye
    a year ago

    Yes indeed. I bought the Tamron 35-150/2-2.8 for hiking and also general studio work. It's a bit of a weight, especially if I put it on the Z9, but I'm not yet so feeble that I can't get it up a hillside.