A subjective
test of the FA* 400mm F/5.6
|
||
|
By: Jostein Øksne, June 2000
|
||
|
This page contains large thumbnails (200x135 pixels, ca. 17K each). By clicking the thumbnails, you get a larger version, 600x400 pixels. Typical file size around 130K. some additional info is included on the large-version page. Technical details on each shot show up if you move your mouse over the image without clicking.
|
||
The first films.... |
||
|
At first, I took most of the pictures hand-held at aperture speeds of 1/500 or faster. I decided to use ISO 200 films to gain speed, but I got home with whole lot of images taken at f/5.6 and f/8 nontheless. -So I quickly decided to let the second phase of testing include a tripod... And less grainy film.... I bought the lens in March 2000, so one very natural subject were nest-building birds like magpie and great tit. With this focal width, there is a realistic chance of getting close enough for a shot without disturbing the birds' activities. |
||
 133Kb |
Still, even if the magpie build nests almost anywhere, they are sceptical to humans that show any interest in them. They were notoriously difficult to apporach. They didn't care much about the AF whizz, though. It was my behaviour they didn't like. So, after a while my hunter's instincts wore off and gave room for some more rational thinking. One of the first things that crossed my mind was to test flare control. The properties of the famous SMC coating. |
|
 180Kb |
And the coating lives up. In the left image, the sun is within the frame in the lower left corner. To the right, you can see how the strong light affects the previous frame. I guess this is a weak point in the construction of the Z-1, but it clearly shows how well flare is controlled in the lens. |
 134K |
| So far so good. But at the end of the day, the most important quality in a lens is still to deliver sharp images. I mentioned starting out with ISO 200 film... I am used to 50 and 100 films. When looking at the 200 films in a loupe, the grain difference was so pronounced that I got a bit confused. I didn't feel comfortable about judging lens sharpness from these films at all. Still, I have included one image that I like. Don't trust the digital completely, though... it has been sharpened a bit (by old habit) in Photoshop. I regret that I didn't do the same motif with the FA 100/2.8 macro, with the same film, to see the difference between lenses. |
 92Kb |
|
Back to familiar films |
||
|
Currently, I use the Kodak E-100 VS a lot. It's not as sharp and contrasty as Fuji Velvia, but the colours are warmer. This is the sharpest film I have used with the 400 so far. The last week-end in April, me and some friends went hiking in the forests surrounding Oslo. All the shots from this trip was taken from a tripod. Most of them in low-light situations with shutter speeds around 1-8 sec. |
 114Kb |
|
 142Kb |
To me, sharpness is acceptable using this film. I got some shots that were clearly better than my expectations. My expectations being based on experience with the M-400/5.6. Especially the details in the plumage of this male mallard duck impressed me. I know it doesn't transcend properly to a lo-res scan, but please have a look at the 600pix anyway.
|
|
 79Kb |
Some other examples to illustrate sharpness. Hey, yes it's running water! Did you believe I could stay away? :-) These shots are details from a dam we passed. The water running over a threshold and through the gate in the dam. |
 106Kb |
Vibrations - a word of warning |
||
 82Kb |
There was a discussion on the PDML a while ago over whether camera orientation affect vibration. With the present motif, only one out of 7 exposures in portrait orientation were reasonably sharp, while 6 out of 7 of the landscape shots lived up to the same standard. I shot every second frame portrait and landscape. I think the ones presented here are acceptable ones. |
 80Kb |
Used with the F-1.7x AF converter |
||
|
This gives an effective focal length of 670mm at f/9.5. Generally, the images turned out too soft for my liking, but stopped down, the sharpness may pass... The combo is difficult to work with, though, because the viewfinder gets too dark. Besides, there is no focus aids (microprisms etc.), so focussing is downright difficult in low light. The AF focus aid, the hexagon in the Z-1 viewfinder, doesn't work either. I tried the combo on an LX too, but the viewfinder was really too dark. |
 125Kb |
|
Bokeh |
||
 63Kb |
I think bokeh is quite nice with this lens. Besides, it feels easier to separate motif from background with this lens than with the M-400/5.6. These two shots are not from the hike. The dead straw to the left is backed by coltsfoot flowers (Tussilago farfara), and the feline beast to the right is the only cat I sometimes wish to kill. It keeps using my kids' sandbox for you know what.... And no, it's not my cat. |
 121Kb |
