Hi John, I don’t know if you read these comments, but there’s a mistake in the review and a positive one.
The moon shot has no chromatic aberration caused by the lens. It’s actually atmospheric dispersion where astronomical objects get a colour shift based on the greater distance light travels through the atmosphere at the top compared to the bottom. The atmospheric acts like a kind of prism.
Astronomy vendors even make correctors which you can adjust depending on the height above the horizon, like this Altair Atmospheric Dispersion corrector for example : www.altairastro.com/altai…r-19-p.asp It has a movable prism inside to correct and reverse the effect with a lever on the side. I use one on my telescope (which is an apochromatic refractor) for astrophotography and visual observation and it works great.
So I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the Nikon 500mm FL lens – having two Fluorite elements should correct chromatic aberration perfectly.
JJP
April 22, 2024 2:22 pm
Another advantage of faster f-ratio lenses, besides faster focusing, faster shutter speeds and lower ISOs, are higher contrast images.
Brendan Harington
February 29, 2024 8:54 am
I’m relatively new to wildlife photography. In the pic on this article. You are shooting at low light with an f4 lens. Why would you opt to shoot at f7.1? Would the Nikon 5.6 prime not have served the same purpose?
Patrick Smith
January 12, 2023 1:22 pm
This is the best lens I’ve ever owned and that’s saying something, so read on…I’ve owned/used almost every single Canon, Nikon and Sony super-tele prime as I am a photojournalist and I shoot Nikon gear for my freelance/personal photography and Canon gear is also provided to me by the newspaper’s and wire services I’ve worked for and still do. The sharpest lens I’ve ever use bar-none is the Nikon “baby Jesus” 800mm f/5.6E VR FL, mentioned as such here! This 500mm f/4E VR FL is the SECOND most sharp lens I’ve ever used. No doubt about it, sharper than the 400mm f/2.8G VR, the 400mm f/2.8E VR FL both of which I owned for years and shot daily. So this is honestly a sleeper lens for sure. Only about 3700 exist in the world and I’m a big city photojournalist and see millions of dollars worth of gear every year, so I know. Plus I do wildlife and nature on the side, never seen one besides my own, out in the wild! If you read the review and oh by the way., best bokeh or OOF/falloff is just sweet. This lens is unreal in every way and hand holdable just as much so as the new Z 400mm f/2.8 S but with more reach and cheaper! Plus this makes an incredible 700mm f/5.6E VR FL with the TC-14E III, about 8% loss in sharpness at most and still fast autofocus, blazingly fast in good light! BUY IT! You will thank me later!
Somnath Goswami
March 21, 2019 8:47 am
That’s a great review. Just bought one . Bought a lenscoat with it and I’m looking forward to use the beast with D500 and D810. I already have a stable tripod and ball head setup and the new 1.4 Tc iii. Please let me know about first steps like firmwire update , af micro adjustment etc once I start using the lens, which is probably this weekend. Regards Somnath
I’d be interested in Imatest results of this lens bare and with the TC14E. The 600/4FL didn’t do well.
HORACIO PATRONE
November 20, 2018 10:18 pm
SE VE QUE ES UN LENTE MARAVILLOSO…..PERO NO ME DA ECONOMICAMENTE PARA COMPRARLO…SOY MUY FELIZ CON MI NIKON D 500 Y MI NIKOR 300 mm f:4 SIN VR…+ NIKON TC 1.4 II CON ESE DINERO DE DIFERENCIA TENGO TRES VIAJES GRATIS AL AFRICA .jajjja saludos pd:TENGO MIS FOTOS EN FLICKER
João Braga
April 2, 2018 1:03 pm
Thanks for very comprehensive review with great sense of humour. I do mainly handheld bird photography, and I currently have the 300mm PF that I use with teleconverters, but I would like to increase my range for a super telephoto, maybe the 500FL. Would it be possible to use close-up filters for the occasional close up photo on the drop in filter holder ? Would I be loosing a lot in image quality ? Thanks for your feedback.
I really don’t think this can ever work. You would be introducing a random lens element into a very complex lens design which probably took Nikon engineers years to perfect and test.
V. Berthelsdorf
January 8, 2018 7:41 pm
Based partially upon this revue, I now have the lens. I will never regret it for all the reasons you have already mentioned. I considered the 600mm, but it was too heavy. I can add the 1.4 converter and still hand hold the lens @700mm. I will miss my first born, but that’s life.
I have the Nikon 500mm f4.0g lens and was considering the new Nikon 500mm f4.0e lens until I read this review. The only real difference between the two is a 1 3/4 lb. reduction in weight, the optic quality is almost the same with the older and new lens. For me personally the cost of the new lens finically is not worth it to me. I know that there is a slight different in the vr but I shoot mostly from a tripod and would probably do the same with the new lens.
Excellent review and beautiful images displayed for both the g lens and e lens. Larry
I changed my mind when I happen to run across the Nikon 500 f4.0e lens in the used section of B & H at a reduced price of $1,300 for an open box lens. I quickly phoned B & H especially since this lens had only been on their website a day or two. I told them to hold the lens and my Nikon 500 f4.0g lens is on its way for partial payment for the Nikon 500 f4.0e lens. My justification was that I am getting older and the almost 2 lb. reduction will be welcome. The other reason is I will be darn if I leave any money behind when I die, ha ha!!! A guy can change his mind, can’t he?
Hi John, I don’t know if you read these comments, but there’s a mistake in the review and a positive one.
The moon shot has no chromatic aberration caused by the lens. It’s actually atmospheric dispersion where astronomical objects get a colour shift based on the greater distance light travels through the atmosphere at the top compared to the bottom. The atmospheric acts like a kind of prism.
Astronomy vendors even make correctors which you can adjust depending on the height above the horizon, like this Altair Atmospheric Dispersion corrector for example
: www.altairastro.com/altai…r-19-p.asp
It has a movable prism inside to correct and reverse the effect with a lever on the side. I use one on my telescope (which is an apochromatic refractor) for astrophotography and visual observation and it works great.
So I don’t think there’s anything wrong with the Nikon 500mm FL lens – having two Fluorite elements should correct chromatic aberration perfectly.
Another advantage of faster f-ratio lenses, besides faster focusing, faster shutter speeds and lower ISOs, are higher contrast images.
I’m relatively new to wildlife photography. In the pic on this article. You are shooting at low light with an f4 lens. Why would you opt to shoot at f7.1?
Would the Nikon 5.6 prime not have served the same purpose?
This is the best lens I’ve ever owned and that’s saying something, so read on…I’ve owned/used almost every single Canon, Nikon and Sony super-tele prime as I am a photojournalist and I shoot Nikon gear for my freelance/personal photography and Canon gear is also provided to me by the newspaper’s and wire services I’ve worked for and still do. The sharpest lens I’ve ever use bar-none is the Nikon “baby Jesus” 800mm f/5.6E VR FL, mentioned as such here! This 500mm f/4E VR FL is the SECOND most sharp lens I’ve ever used. No doubt about it, sharper than the 400mm f/2.8G VR, the 400mm f/2.8E VR FL both of which I owned for years and shot daily. So this is honestly a sleeper lens for sure. Only about 3700 exist in the world and I’m a big city photojournalist and see millions of dollars worth of gear every year, so I know. Plus I do wildlife and nature on the side, never seen one besides my own, out in the wild! If you read the review and oh by the way., best bokeh or OOF/falloff is just sweet. This lens is unreal in every way and hand holdable just as much so as the new Z 400mm f/2.8 S but with more reach and cheaper! Plus this makes an incredible 700mm f/5.6E VR FL with the TC-14E III, about 8% loss in sharpness at most and still fast autofocus, blazingly fast in good light! BUY IT! You will thank me later!
That’s a great review. Just bought one . Bought a lenscoat with it and I’m looking forward to use the beast with D500 and D810. I already have a stable tripod and ball head setup and the new 1.4 Tc iii.
Please let me know about first steps like firmwire update , af micro adjustment etc once I start using the lens, which is probably this weekend.
Regards
Somnath
Do you have Imatest data for this lens?
No. Just tens of thousands of insanely tack sharp real life images.
I’d be interested in Imatest results of this lens bare and with the TC14E. The 600/4FL didn’t do well.
SE VE QUE ES UN LENTE MARAVILLOSO…..PERO NO ME DA ECONOMICAMENTE PARA COMPRARLO…SOY MUY FELIZ CON MI NIKON D 500 Y MI NIKOR 300 mm f:4 SIN VR…+ NIKON TC 1.4 II CON ESE DINERO DE DIFERENCIA TENGO TRES VIAJES GRATIS AL AFRICA .jajjja saludos pd:TENGO MIS FOTOS EN FLICKER
Thanks for very comprehensive review with great sense of humour. I do mainly handheld bird photography, and I currently have the 300mm PF that I use with teleconverters, but I would like to increase my range for a super telephoto, maybe the 500FL. Would it be possible to use close-up filters for the occasional close up photo on the drop in filter holder ? Would I be loosing a lot in image quality ?
Thanks for your feedback.
I really don’t think this can ever work. You would be introducing a random lens element into a very complex lens design which probably took Nikon engineers years to perfect and test.
Based partially upon this revue, I now have the lens. I will never regret it for all the reasons you have already mentioned. I considered the 600mm, but it was too heavy. I can add the 1.4 converter and still hand hold the lens @700mm. I will miss my first born, but that’s life.
Yeah, I know. Review.
I have the Nikon 500mm f4.0g lens and was considering the new Nikon 500mm f4.0e lens until I read this review. The only real difference between the two is a 1 3/4 lb. reduction in weight, the optic quality is almost the same with the older and new lens. For me personally the cost of the new lens finically is not worth it to me. I know that there is a slight different in the vr but I shoot mostly from a tripod and would probably do the same with the new lens.
Excellent review and beautiful images displayed for both the g lens and e lens.
Larry
I changed my mind when I happen to run across the Nikon 500 f4.0e lens in the used section of B & H at a reduced price of $1,300 for an open box lens. I quickly phoned B & H especially since this lens had only been on their website a day or two. I told them to hold the lens and my Nikon 500 f4.0g lens is on its way for partial payment for the Nikon 500 f4.0e lens.
My justification was that I am getting older and the almost 2 lb. reduction will be welcome. The other reason is I will be darn if I leave any money behind when I die, ha ha!!! A guy can change his mind, can’t he?
Larry