www.testfreaks.com

Reviews, reviews, reviews...

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 80–400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR
9.4 out of 10

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 80–400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR

Great Deal: $1,999.00

Reviews and Problems with Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 80–400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR

Showing 1-10 of 13
Overall 4
4.0

Too "soft" for me

StuDawg , Nikon
2 weeks ago
  • Summary: I know zoom lenses get softer as the focal length increases, but past 250 mm this lens sharpness is unacceptable. So I invested another $500 in the TC 14E iii, now I have $3,052 with tax into it, not to mention $650 for my gimbal head, but I already had that.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

Reliability Concerns

jmr67, Amazon
15 December 2013
  • Summary: After 6 months I had to send the lens to Nikon for warranty repairs along with a 2 month old D7100 body, both of which began having problems at the start of a 10 day photo safari. Auto focus would stop working at apparently random times during the day.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

Not happy yet

Craig M. Woods, Amazon
14 December 2013
  • Summary: I bought a 80-400, G Series lens and a D7100 body for taking bird pictures. This combination gives me 120-600 35mm equivalent. It replaced a Canon SX50HS (~$500) once I knew my recent interest in birding would continue. The pictures aren't as good as the Canon (24-1200 35mm equivalent).
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

High Hopes

Sky, B&H Photo
21 June 2013
  • Excerpt: I'm a wildlife photographer, mostly birds. This lens was very fast and accurate focusing, and the pictures were sharp and clear. I took a few photos with a 2X teleconverter (manual focus)that were excellent. Unfortunately, there was a problem with the VR.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

Make sure you get a good copy

Gizmo, B&H Photo
27 May 2013
  • Excerpt: Like many people I was excited when this new 80-400mm AF-S VR design was announced. With the price tag north of $2600 I decided to rent this lens first. I'm glad I did because I would not have been happy if I had shelled out that kind of cash only to be disappointed in the IQ and performance.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Victor-BRA, Adorama
29 May 2012
  • Excerpt: Well, the 80-400mm isn't a lens for wildlife photos, because it isn't sharp and the focus is too slow. I think that the Nikon should do a new one, further if the Nikon make a new one better than the oldest they will increase the number of new photograph with Nikon cameras. Why a think that?
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Victor-BRA, Adorama
28 May 2012
  • Excerpt: Well, the 80-400mm isn't a lens for wildlife photos, because it isn't sharp and the focus is too slow. I think that the Nikon should do a new one, further if the Nikon make a new one better than the oldest they will increase the number of new photograph with Nikon cameras. Why a think that?
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Adorama
26 April 2011
  • Excerpt: I owned this lens a couple of years ago...and it was too slow for wildlife photography. The lens isn't made for low-light shooting...which is when much of the wildlife world is up and moving, morning and evening. So..
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Adorama
17 April 2011
  • Excerpt: I own many Nikkor Lenses and this is the only one with which I am disappointed. I have three major problems with the lens. First, the autofocus being outdated is very slow. Second, images exposed at 400mm and f/5.6 are extremely soft.
  • Read full review
Overall 4
4.0

User Review

Murph, Adorama
3 January 2011
  • Excerpt: I have a love/hate relationship with this lens. When used right, it is a good, albeit not great lens, but it focuses too slowly even on my D2X, it is less sharp than I would like, and poorly balanced. Not a lens I can recommend to friends or acquaintances.
  • Read full review
Next page >>