Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
Maybe our hopes won't be fully met as much as we'd like. The 500 PF may not set records, but I wouldn't say it underperforms.In that case they should perform as the Zeiss Otus on D3X, but they don't. They actually underperform on the D3X that is only 24MP on FF. And I really don't see how it could be any better on D850.
The 300/4 PF is not close to the 300/2.8 VR in performance.
Even the 300/4 AF-S has less aberrations stopped down a bit.
(do mouse-over on the test image, and the little arrow points left/right on the current lens):
https://www.the-digital-picture.com...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
The PF-lenses is a compromise between weight/size and optical performance. If you want to go lightweight, you will pay with some image quality.
But it's not only about lens design. Manufacturing is as important. Hopefully the 500mm PF will have less initial QC issues than the 300mm PF.
Here is a test of the 300mm/4 PF on D800E (36MP), it's not what I would call a sharp lens. It's quite soft actually.
https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/300mm-f4e-pf-ed-vr-af-s-nikkor/blur/nikon-d800e/
A lens that is razor sharp is one of Nikons later designs, the 105mm/1.4E ED, and it might be one of the sharpest they have. But note that you have to stop down to f5.6. (On Z-mount that will probably not be needed.)
https://www.imaging-resource.com/lenses/nikon/105mm-f1.4e-ed-af-s-nikkor/blur/nikon-d800e/
It is difficult to compare the different lenses on different sites performed on different bodies.
Looking at an available range of lenses from both Canon and Nikon on both sites - 200/f2, 300/f2.8 II, 300/F4PF, 100-400/f5.6 II, 180-400/f4, 400/f4 DO II, and Sigma 500/f4, shows that they are all within the same ballpark (several %) IQ wise as the 500PF in the range f5.6 - f8 ..... bearing in mind that we will mostly be concerned with central sharpness.
As has been pretty well reported, the Nikon 300PF may show more unit to unit variability than desirable and not be up to quite the same standards as the FL supertele's or Canon's big whites.
It also seems that Nikon may be using a simpler type of diffraction grating than Canon does on its 400 f4 DO II, so it may not merely be a diffractive vs refractive issue.
The PF's may be optimised for lower weight/size/relative cost, but I don't think they're giving up much in IQ from the best supertelephoto's, and they look to serve the purpose of raising the bar from the consumer supertelephotos.
Let's not forget that even 500mm on a FF is certainly not a luxurious excess of length when trying to photograph small birds, so I would think a D850 cropped down to APS-C levels is still a useful and desirable outcome.
Anyway, if Nikon is listening then they can lift the IQ levels of the 600 f5.6 PF - that's the one I think most of us are waiting on (it seems there will be no announcement of it at Photokina - so we might be waiting longer yet).
I'd even prefer a 600 f4 PF over that - ya got yer ears on good lil' Nikon buddy - come back ...... :cat:
Chosun :gh: