The Nikon 80-400mm VR f/4.5-5.6 has some significant limitations.

Introduction

The requirements of a recent assignment sent me looking for something longer than the end of my Nikon AF 80-200mm 2.8D ED zoom lens. The low-end 70-300mm Nikkors have noticeably inferior image quality, speed, and build quality in comparison with the high-end ED larger aperture lenses, so these were never a serious consideration. Similar lenses from other manufacturers (Sigma, Tamron, etc.) suffer from the same problems and usually to a greater extent. Most of Nikon's higher end offerings come with a price tag from $2000 - $5000, and that was more than what I wanted to spend. So, two contenders emerged. The 80-400mm VR 4.5-5.6, and the new AF-S 300mm 4.0 IF. Here's what I found after spending some time with a friend's 80-400mm VR, mounted on a Nikon F100 and a Nikon D100.

Features

From the manufacturer:

- Lens Construction: 17 elements in 11 groups (3 ED)
- Picture Angle: 30 degrees 10 minutes-6 degrees 10 minutes
- Minimum Focus Distance: 7.5 ft.
- Maximum Reproduction Ratio (Macro Setting): 1:4.8
- Attachment/ Filter Size: 77mm
- Dimensions (diameter x length - in.): 3.6 x 6.7 in.
- Weight (oz.): 47 oz.
- Nikon Lens Hood: HB-24
- Case(s): Ballistic Nylon CL-M1
- Included Accessories: HB-24 Hood, CL-M1 case, 77mm lens cap, rear cap

Performance

Focusing speed is average compared to most Nikkor lenses and noticeably slower than both my 80-200mm 2.8 Nikkor and my AF-S 300mm Nikkor. This was true when using the 80-400mm VR on both the F100 and D100 bodies. On the D100, the 80-400mm VR tends to hunt more and take more time to lock-on than it did on the F100. On the latter, this lens still doesn't feel like a professional performer because it lacks the speed and accuracy that I've come to expect from Nikon's higher end lenses. Without AF-S, it is a little noisy, but this is nothing really worth complaining about. I am much more concerned about focus speed and accuracy than I am about a little motor noise since I've never had noise affect my pictures.

Handling is good - with my slightly larger than average hands, this lens feels well-balanced and both rings are easy to grip and usually easy to use. The zoom ring is overdampened, resulting in a bit more effort than I'd like to adjust focal lengths. The focus ring has a much smoother feel, but is still not as appropriately dampened as any of the manual Nikkors. Another handling complaint is the external zooming. This means the lens extends when zooming, thereby constantly shifting the balance of the lens slightly. The result is small corresponding adjustments in hand and arm muscles to keep the lens on target. Over time, this can become tedious. At 47 ounces, this lens is heavy enough to provide some stability when used hand-held, but not so heavy as to cause fatigue to set in just when you're about to get that good shot. Its size/focal length ratio is very good - it's compact enough that I can usually swing it around without hitting something, even in somewhat small spaces.

Vibration reduction (VR) on this lens really works. Zoomed to 400mm at f5.6, you can get the same shots that would normally require the shutter speeds associated with an f2.8 aperture. This means you can leave the tripod behind more often. In fact, this lens doesn't really like tripods very much. If you forget to turn off the vibration reduction, you'll end up with blury pictures when shot from a tripod (turn it off as Nikon suggests and you shouldn't have any problems). Additionally, and as has been mentioned in other forums, the tripod collar feels a little flimsy compared to other Nikkor telephotos and long zooms. Although I haven't experienced it, I advise doing some research into the blury picture problem that is potentially associated with the design of this collar. When you don't need the collar, it can be easily removed from the lens for better handling.

Durability can only be judged after months or years of usage. However, build quality can be used to help make an educated guess about expected durability. The 80-400mm VR is comprised of a combination of metal and plastic and has the feel of at least a semi-professional lens. Unlike real professional lenses, this one may suffer from some moisture problems; I've heard of a couple cases of rain water causing the lens to permanently malfunction and require service or replacement from Nikon. I'm not sure of the validity of these cases but again, I advise doing some research into this issue if you plan to use this lens extensively in wet environments. Can it take a few knocks? Sure, and the one I used had taken a few. Still, it doesn't quite feel like it could withstand professional use as well as the 80-200mm 2.8 models have, or as well as the AF-S 300mm 4.0.

Image quality of the 80-400mm VR is good, but not great. As is to be expected, image quality is especially good away from the extremes of 80mm at f4.5 and 400mm at f5.6. However, even at 400mm and f5.6, I was able to get some sharp shots with nice color rendition. I emphasize "some" because over time, I started to see the difference between photos from the 80-400mm VR and photos taken from real professional lenses. None of the shots from the 80-400mm VR were as sharp as similar shots taken on the same type of film with my Nikkor AF 80-200mm 2.8D ED or my Nikkor AF-S 300mm 4.0 IF. If you really need professional image quality, I can't recommend the 80-400mm VR from a sharpness perspective, although it can occasionally achieve pro-level sharpness. Otherwise, ghosting and flare were seldom problems in my photos, and distortion near the edges of my frames was minimal. Most of my test shots exhibited a lot of contrast but again, not as much as either my AF 80-200mm 2.8 or my AF-S 300mm 4.0 IF.

A note of caution about small minimum aperture vibration reduction lenses. The idea of vibration reduction (on Canon, Nikon, or any other lens) is attractive, but remember that it only addresses one problem: camera shake. So yes, you can shoot an f5.6 lens as if it were an f2.8 lens, but only if 1) your subject isn't in motion, therefore requiring a fast shutter speed and 2) only if you don't need the very small depth of field that larger minimum apertures can provide. If either of these is a factor in your shot, you will quickly realize that VR is worthless compared to an f2.8 lens. If you have an f2.8 lens with VR, then you're set, but you're also going to pay a lot more than the price of this slow f4.5-5.6 lens. One other disadvantage of vibration reduction is that it uses significantly more battery power; be sure you have a back-up set of fully-charged batteries or you may find yourself very unhappy with your VR lens.

Conclusions

Although this is a reasonably good lens for advanced amateur use and occasional professional use, professionals will likely notice its limitations when compared with other long Nikkor glass. Image quality is good but not as good as the less expensive AF 80-200mm 2.8D ED. Vibration reduction really works, but you really need to keep in mind its limitations, as well as the limitations of the slow aperture of this lens. If you haven't committed to Nikon in terms of your lens and body investments, consider Canon if most of your shooting will require telephoto focal lengths. If you have committed to Nikon and only need 300mm, get the AF-S 300mm 4.0 IF for professional quality image characteristics and professional build quality. If you only need 200mm, get one of the AF 80-200mm 2.8 zooms (they're all good) and again, you'll get pro-quality image characteristics and pro-quality build.