Nikkor 500mm f5.46pf lens - any users yet ? (1 Viewer)

[dragnil]

After a ten month wait I now have mine and it was worth waiting for. First impressions are very good, I'll post in more detail when I have something to say. Autofocus is snappy and the whole thing is half the weight of my 200-400 which I've been having trouble using as it seems to be a kilo heavier as each year passes.

 

[JPAC]

Nikon 300mm f4PF + TC1.4 is about £2170 and the 500mm f5.6PF is about £3,700 and only 80mm longer, worth it?

 

[Neil G.]

Nikon 300mm f4PF + TC1.4 is about £2170 and the 500mm f5.6PF is about £3,700 and only 80mm longer, worth it?

Makes you wonder does'nt it.

 

[marcsantacurz]

Nikon 300mm f4PF + TC1.4 is about £2170 and the 500mm f5.6PF is about £3,700 and only 80mm longer, worth it?

I think so. While the 300 + 1.4x takes good pictures, they are not as razor sharp as the 500 PF. At least that's my experience with my samples of both.

Marc

 

[Tanager]

Hi,
I've had my 500 pf for a year now and I'm always blown away by the image quality. I used to use (and still do) the 300mm pf with the 1.4x III on a D500, I was impressed by that combo, but the 500mm pf is on a different level all together. I the past I also had the 200-500, image quality while good is nowhere near the 500pf and the 200-500 was much more cumbersome to use and I always found that I was using the 500mm end so the zoom of this lens was wasted on me.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

Mark

 

[dragnil]

I agree with Tanager, the image quality is excellent - just as good as the 200-400 I've been using since 2004 usually with a 1.4 TC. It was unusual to be using a length less than the max (400) so the zoom feature wasn't too important and the greatest thing about this new lens is the lighter weight. Fifteen years ago, the zoom, which I was very happy with, seemed easy to carry all day but now I'm enjoying the lightness of the 500 PF - yes, worth the wait.

 

[Neil G.]

Hi,
I've had my 500 pf for a year now and I'm always blown away by the image quality. I used to use (and still do) the 300mm pf with the 1.4x III on a D500, I was impressed by that combo, but the 500mm pf is on a different level all together. I the past I also had the 200-500, image quality while good is nowhere near the 500pf and the 200-500 was much more cumbersome to use and I always found that I was using the 500mm end so the zoom of this lens was wasted on me.

Anyway, those are my thoughts.

Mark

I'd like to see an image you've taken with the 500mm if the 200-500mm is nowhere near as good.

 

[dragnil]

Hi Neil,
I'm risking setting myself up as an Aunt Sally with this, but here's one from this morning - and this was shot through the double glazing...
David

 

[Neil G.]

Here is one shot with the 200-500mm and reduced to 1.5 million pixels.There is no way that the 500mm is far better than the 200-500 as the other poster said......he obviously wasn't getting the best out of it.
Yes,it's probably sharper being a prime with slightly better contrast,but to say it's far better is a bit of an overstatement.

 

[Tanager]

Here is one shot with the 200-500mm and reduced to 1.5 million pixels.There is no way that the 500mm is far better than the 200-500 as the other poster said......he obviously wasn't getting the best out of it.
Yes,it's probably sharper being a prime with slightly better contrast,but to say it's far better is a bit of an overstatement.

Have you shot with both? I have. It's my my opinion, I'm entitled to it just as you are yours.

Goodbye

 

[Neil G.]

I wasn't being nasty,i was just stating a fact,not an opinion.Maybe you had a bad copy,it's not unknown with the 200-500mm.
If you like,send in some images so we can compare them to see just how much better the 500mm is compared to the 200-500mm.........sort of a comparison competition if you like.I already stated that the 500mm will ultimately be slightly better in both detail and contrast,it is a prime after all.
After looking extensively at images taken with the 500mm i can honestly say that i'm not worried about doing a little comparison competition......are you........you shouldn't be if your 500mm is so much better lol.
I can't honestly see enough of a difference to justify the price.......over 3 grand for the 500mm or under a grand for the 200-500mm,plus the fact you have the flexibility of the zoom......i suppose if you are more into the technical side of a photo ie looking at your shots at 100% crop all the time it may be worth it.Me,i'm old school.......i just like to look at a nice photo and enjoy it......perhaps that's the difference between us.
Good day to you sir.