Reserved this lens to shoot the 4/8/2024 Total Solar Eclipse with my D850. Thoughts, suggestions or concerns? Or other lens?
stephan
February 15, 2024 5:09 am
I own the 500mmPF (and the 300mm PF) for years, using it almost every day with a D850. Before I own the 200-500 F5,6, so I can speak with experience. I can assure you that there was a reason why I sold my Zoom and spent almost tripple money: The 200-500 Zoom ist not really a 500mm lens as the quality fails in maximum focal lenght. There is no contrast and a lot of blurr. The speed of the AF is a disaster. When I got my 500PF I thought I was in heaven. As I travel too much by airplane and motorbike I could never do wildlife-photography like this, with a heavy pro-lens. Sometimes I would like to have more range and a 800 FL would help a lot, but there is no benefit from TCs, that’s a myth. And by the way: in hot countries is a limitation of range by the effect of heat flimmering, no matter how sharp your lens is.
Agree 100% about the AF speed of the 200-500 – truly awful. I have the 500 PF and the older 300/f4D, both bought used (£3,000 in total), and think both are excellent. I use them mainly with a D7500 – no mid-price Z mount has better AF, so I’m sticking with it.
Alfred
February 7, 2024 8:05 am
Great review! Sadly no sharpness test with the TC-17E II!
I appreciate the comment. It’s a great lens. Probably the 1.7 would be between the 1.4 and 2.0…personally, I don’t use teleconverters much.
Maestro
February 2, 2024 10:58 am
After years of lugging the hefty 200-500 on a D7500 (with strap on lens foot) I was fortunate to receive a 500PF as a holiday gift. It feels practically weightless compared to the zoom and has slightly but noticeably better IQ and focus speed. BIF performance on that body isn’t the greatest, but otherwise it does everything else I want it to do. It also performs impeccably with the FTZ on my Z6 on occasions when I prefer that combo. I used the zoom at 500mm 90% of the time, so loss of shorter focal lengths is worth the improved ease of use in my 70 year old arthritic hands. I imagine will adapt it to a 45mp Z body if the 7500 ever fails or disappoints. The zoom has a new home on my brother’s tripod overlooking Puget Sound.
Ian
January 5, 2024 10:27 am
I wonder if anybody can help me, I have just moved over to Nikon from Sony. I shoot mostly motorsport. I have a Z8 and 70-200 2.8, I am after something with longer reach (have been using 200-600 5.6/6.3) considering this 500 with converter or the new Z mount 180-600. Does anybody have any recommendations. Many thanks in advance.
I’d probably go to the 180-600 if you’re used to the zoom and want flexibility. For motorsports, you’re really not going to run into a situation where the *slight* sharpness difference matters.
Jon Middleton
January 5, 2024 10:04 am
Thanks for the reply, Jason. Do you think PL will ever Imatest the 500FL? I ask because I’ve never been able to find any formal test results on this lens, despite the fact that it seemed to be the best choice in Nikon’s FL superteles given its reach, size, weight and price. Also, maybe because the 500PF is so good, used prices on the FL are nearly 50% off the new price, so quite a bargain.
Jon Middleton
December 31, 2023 10:47 am
I have the 500PF, it’s my main waterfowl BIF lens. I bought it after I’d already bought the 500/4FL, as it was introduced later.
Couple of thoughts. First, why was the comparison to the 500/4 done with the older version instead of the FL? I’d be very interested in the imatest scores of the 500PF compared to the 500/4FL. I have been unable to demonstrate a difference in my back yard brick wall tests.
Second, the TCs. I own the TC14E II, and the results I get with it on either lens seem inferior to cropping the bare lens images. Contrast was reduced with the TCs, sharpness looks very similar.
I borrowed a TC14E III and compared it to my II version and didn’t see an improvement in the newer version. That seem to track pretty well with others’s experience.
Hey Jon! Thanks for the comment. It’s just that we didn’t test the 500FL yet. Though I suspect based on Lenstip’s test of the Sigma 500 sport that the 500 PF is a few points behind the 500FL.
The TC seems to work better on Z cameras. The focus inconsistencies on Z cameras with the TC can be troublesome….that being said, since this lens is f/5.6 I think no TC is best most of the time, and the TC would be far superior on your 500FL.
The reason I ask is the used price on these lenses is almost 50% off new in excellent condition. KEH says they have four in stock. Seems like a bargain.
It is absolutely a bargain, Jon. But I thought you already bought the 500FL? I’ll see if it is possible but I think right now the latest mirrorless lenses are a priority for testing.
Thanks, Jason. Do you think you’ll ever test the 500FL and provide Imatest data? It’s been out for a few years now. I ask because they seem to be a great value on the used market, nearly 50% off the new price.
I agree the Sigma is sharper than the 500PF as tested by Lenstip. Brad Hill said the Sigma and the 500FL are optically the same, but he doesn’t do lab testing to my knowledge. I’m just curious why the 500FL hasn’t been formally tested, as in my opinion it was the best all around choice in Nikon’s FL superteles given the focal length, weight and price. Sherman really raved about it.
Arun
December 29, 2023 1:24 am
I have been using Nikkor 200-500 with D750 since last 7 years or so. Especially for bird photography. Results are not bad at all in good light, and of course if you handle the gear well. The only issue is weight. I am 76 and would prefer a lighter combo. Will a changeover to 500/ 5.6 help & do I need to upgrade my camera as well ? Not keen on spending a fortune
The 500 f/5.6 will be SIGNIFICANTLY lighter and a bit sharper. I don’t think you need to upgrade. If you can get nice results (AF-wise) with your D750, it will work even better with the 500PF, which racks focus twice as fast. The focus recall feature is nice too.
Robert John
November 23, 2023 1:35 pm
There are 2 reasons to read reviews: 1) to help decide whether and what to buy 2) to decide not to sell. Just because I have a Z mount camera is no reason to trade this lens, especially given the price of the 400/f4.5. Looks like I’ll stick with my trusty 300/f4D and this, despite them being a bit much to carry around. Their IQ is top class. Just need the Z6iii to come up to expectation. That’s a very important camera for Nikon to get right given the Sony A7iv.
Tom P
November 14, 2023 9:52 am
I just reverted from a Z6 back to a D850. I am considering two options. This 500mm or a used 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4TC. Will this 500mm give me similar image quality than the 300mm + TC option? I used to have the 300mm + 1.4TC and my image sharpness was breathtaking using a D700 that I used to own.
Get the 500pf I’m selling my 300mm f2.8 and 1.4 TC as it’s soft wide open at F4 on my d500. Needs to be stopped down at least 2/3rds of a stop for good sharpness. Once the 300mm sells I’m buying a 500pf which is what I sould have brought to start with.
Reserved this lens to shoot the 4/8/2024 Total Solar Eclipse with my D850. Thoughts, suggestions or concerns? Or other lens?
I own the 500mmPF (and the 300mm PF) for years, using it almost every day with a D850. Before I own the 200-500 F5,6, so I can speak with experience. I can assure you that there was a reason why I sold my Zoom and spent almost tripple money: The 200-500 Zoom ist not really a 500mm lens as the quality fails in maximum focal lenght. There is no contrast and a lot of blurr. The speed of the AF is a disaster. When I got my 500PF I thought I was in heaven. As I travel too much by airplane and motorbike I could never do wildlife-photography like this, with a heavy pro-lens. Sometimes I would like to have more range and a 800 FL would help a lot, but there is no benefit from TCs, that’s a myth. And by the way: in hot countries is a limitation of range by the effect of heat flimmering, no matter how sharp your lens is.
Agree 100% about the AF speed of the 200-500 – truly awful. I have the 500 PF and the older 300/f4D, both bought used (£3,000 in total), and think both are excellent. I use them mainly with a D7500 – no mid-price Z mount has better AF, so I’m sticking with it.
Great review!
Sadly no sharpness test with the TC-17E II!
I appreciate the comment. It’s a great lens. Probably the 1.7 would be between the 1.4 and 2.0…personally, I don’t use teleconverters much.
After years of lugging the hefty 200-500 on a D7500 (with strap on lens foot) I was fortunate to receive a 500PF as a holiday gift. It feels practically weightless compared to the zoom and has slightly but noticeably better IQ and focus speed. BIF performance on that body isn’t the greatest, but otherwise it does everything else I want it to do. It also performs impeccably with the FTZ on my Z6 on occasions when I prefer that combo. I used the zoom at 500mm 90% of the time, so loss of shorter focal lengths is worth the improved ease of use in my 70 year old arthritic hands. I imagine will adapt it to a 45mp Z body if the 7500 ever fails or disappoints. The zoom has a new home on my brother’s tripod overlooking Puget Sound.
I wonder if anybody can help me, I have just moved over to Nikon from Sony. I shoot mostly motorsport. I have a Z8 and 70-200 2.8, I am after something with longer reach (have been using 200-600 5.6/6.3) considering this 500 with converter or the new Z mount 180-600. Does anybody have any recommendations. Many thanks in advance.
I’d probably go to the 180-600 if you’re used to the zoom and want flexibility. For motorsports, you’re really not going to run into a situation where the *slight* sharpness difference matters.
Thanks for the reply, Jason. Do you think PL will ever Imatest the 500FL? I ask because I’ve never been able to find any formal test results on this lens, despite the fact that it seemed to be the best choice in Nikon’s FL superteles given its reach, size, weight and price. Also, maybe because the 500PF is so good, used prices on the FL are nearly 50% off the new price, so quite a bargain.
I have the 500PF, it’s my main waterfowl BIF lens. I bought it after I’d already bought the 500/4FL, as it was introduced later.
Couple of thoughts. First, why was the comparison to the 500/4 done with the older version instead of the FL? I’d be very interested in the imatest scores of the 500PF compared to the 500/4FL. I have been unable to demonstrate a difference in my back yard brick wall tests.
Second, the TCs. I own the TC14E II, and the results I get with it on either lens seem inferior to cropping the bare lens images. Contrast was reduced with the TCs, sharpness looks very similar.
I borrowed a TC14E III and compared it to my II version and didn’t see an improvement in the newer version. That seem to track pretty well with others’s experience.
Hey Jon! Thanks for the comment. It’s just that we didn’t test the 500FL yet. Though I suspect based on Lenstip’s test of the Sigma 500 sport that the 500 PF is a few points behind the 500FL.
The TC seems to work better on Z cameras. The focus inconsistencies on Z cameras with the TC can be troublesome….that being said, since this lens is f/5.6 I think no TC is best most of the time, and the TC would be far superior on your 500FL.
Thanks, Jason. Do you know if you’ll be testing the 500/4FL? It’s been out a few years, I’m starting to lose confidence.
The reason I ask is the used price on these lenses is almost 50% off new in excellent condition. KEH says they have four in stock. Seems like a bargain.
It is absolutely a bargain, Jon. But I thought you already bought the 500FL? I’ll see if it is possible but I think right now the latest mirrorless lenses are a priority for testing.
Thanks, Jason. Do you think you’ll ever test the 500FL and provide Imatest data? It’s been out for a few years now. I ask because they seem to be a great value on the used market, nearly 50% off the new price.
I agree the Sigma is sharper than the 500PF as tested by Lenstip. Brad Hill said the Sigma and the 500FL are optically the same, but he doesn’t do lab testing to my knowledge. I’m just curious why the 500FL hasn’t been formally tested, as in my opinion it was the best all around choice in Nikon’s FL superteles given the focal length, weight and price. Sherman really raved about it.
I have been using Nikkor 200-500 with D750 since last 7 years or so. Especially for bird photography. Results are not bad at all in good light, and of course if you handle the gear well. The only issue is weight. I am 76 and would prefer a lighter combo. Will a changeover to 500/ 5.6 help & do I need to upgrade my camera as well ? Not keen on spending a fortune
The 500 f/5.6 will be SIGNIFICANTLY lighter and a bit sharper. I don’t think you need to upgrade. If you can get nice results (AF-wise) with your D750, it will work even better with the 500PF, which racks focus twice as fast. The focus recall feature is nice too.
There are 2 reasons to read reviews:
1) to help decide whether and what to buy
2) to decide not to sell.
Just because I have a Z mount camera is no reason to trade this lens, especially given the price of the 400/f4.5.
Looks like I’ll stick with my trusty 300/f4D and this, despite them being a bit much to carry around. Their IQ is top class.
Just need the Z6iii to come up to expectation. That’s a very important camera for Nikon to get right given the Sony A7iv.
I just reverted from a Z6 back to a D850. I am considering two options. This 500mm or a used 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4TC. Will this 500mm give me similar image quality than the 300mm + TC option? I used to have the 300mm + 1.4TC and my image sharpness was breathtaking using a D700 that I used to own.
Get the 500pf
I’m selling my 300mm f2.8 and 1.4 TC as it’s soft wide open at F4 on my d500. Needs to be stopped down at least 2/3rds of a stop for good sharpness.
Once the 300mm sells I’m buying a 500pf which is what I sould have brought to start with.