500PF worth it?

[RichF]

I have a 600 F4 as well as the 500PF. The PF is lighter and easily hand held. Not so for the 600 F4. Aside from the extra 100mm the 600F4 works well with a TC. not so the 500 PF The TC really slows down the AF on the 500 PF.

As far as the trade goes, I don't know the condition of 500 F4 G and if it is Nikon US or gray market. Assuming very good condition and Nikon US, then based upon the prices I found on Fred Miranda Buy and Sell, I would say your lens is worth more than $4000, perhaps as much as $4200-4400. To sell it you would need to absorb paypal fees and shipping but even with these you would be gross over paying for hte 500 PF

 

[abc123brian]

It might be worth your time to get quotes from KEH and MPB before making a decision.

 

[brachypelma44]

It's a game-changing lens. By that, I mean it changes how you shoot. It takes you off of the tripod and/or monopod and allows you to shoot handheld 100% of the time (if that's what you want, anyway.) The benefits of that: you're quicker on the draw when you encounter animals, and you'll be more likely to take it on hikes with you than a big, heavy lens + tripod/monopod system. Bottom line: more wildlife opportunities.

 

[Squatch]

It might be worth your time to get quotes from KEH and MPB before making a decision.

KEH and MPB offered me $2750 and $2880, respectively.

 

[abc123brian]

KEH and MPB offered me $2750 and $2880, respectively.

Then the deal you have sounds like it might be the best path. I also don’t don’t like selling on my own because of the amount of fraud out there. Good luck with your decision and I‘m curious to know what you decide.

 

[Warren D]

While the switch from a 500G to 500 pf might be worthwhile, the asking price of the pf is too high. For an additional $197 you can get a new one with a warranty (if this lens was previously sold, it's used and Nikon USA only warranties to the original purchaser.)

 

[FB101]

Well, it’s your money but IMHO, you are paying through the nose at $3400.00 for that lens.

I agree. $3600 new and $3000 used pristine seem to be the going prices.

 

[Squatch]

While the switch from a 500G to 500 pf might be worthwhile, the asking price of the pf is too high. For an additional $197 you can get a new one with a warranty (if this lens was previously sold, it's used and Nikon USA only warranties to the original purchaser.)

Thank you. I hadn’t even thought about the warranty, it completely slipped my mind.

 

[Squatch]

The 500PF is a special, unique and amazing lens that perfectly matched its design. However it isn’t an f4 prime. If buying the 500PF forces the sale of the 500f4 then you would need to know it’s limitations with a tele and decide that for you size is more important then the versatility of the f4 and it’s output.

Another solid choice that would compliment your prime is the 200-500. I sold mine for under $900 in mint condition to a member of this board. It’s very versatile and compliments the big prime. Now if you can sell the 500 f4 and get a 600f4 then the PF would also be a nice companion.

I don’t have to sell the 500 G to finance the PF, I just don’t see any reason for me to have two 500mm prime lenses (regardless of aperture). One of them would inevitably end up in the closet, never being used.
I recently sold my 200-500 for that exact reason; once I got the 500 G, I didn’t touch the 200-500 at all. Not once.
So, if I decide to get a PF, I would want to get rid of the 500 G while it’s still worth something, rather than having it sit in my closet for a year or two and then selling it for next to nothing.

 

[WBYonder]

I agree. $3600 new and $3000 used pristine seem to be the going prices.

…or $3000 refurbished ($2700 on sale at 10% off, if you time it right) with 90 day warranty.

 

[DrBob]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

 

[PeggyBaker]

Sold my 500 f/4G to pay for the 500PF. Not sorry. I was in the same situation as you, I just couldn't handle dragging around the tripod and gimbal. It caused me to miss shots, plus get exhausted. Plus, I like to go out on boats looking for pelagic birds, and no tripods or monopods are allowed for safety reasons. Being able to handhold the 500PF made the tradeoffs worthwhile..

 

[Snapshot2020]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

That’s not good to have a $3600 Lens sitting in a closet, just my opinion. Question, what Camera body was the slightly blurry images coming from and did you try other Camera bodies.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

bummer ... I had a similar experience with Nkon support and a 200-500 I was told by a dealer that it Nikon some times takes 3 times to fix the problem and for me it did ... the first time nothing was really improved, the second time it was much better but still having panning focus issues and the week I got it back Nikon recalled it for panning focus issues and after the 3rd round trip it was great. Sold it a while back and now do have a 500pf and it works well although it is a bit light for my taste.

 

[Ken Miracle]

I’m seriously considering a 500PF, for the glaringly obvious reasons. My current wildlife lens is a 500mm f/4G, and it’s fantastic, but in many situations, it’s quite cumbersome, even for a huge man like myself. I use it paired to a Z6II/FTZ, with and without a TC14EIII (the majority of the time, the TC is mounted), on a monopod.
I do have a tripod and gimbal, but the vast majority of my shooting is kind of “run and gun”...I hike, and shoot if and when I see something. I don’t typically bring the tripod/gimbal setup and sit in one spot and shoot, so the size and weight of the PF is quite enticing.
Since I’m shooting mirrorless, I’m not concerned with the AF system at f/8 with the TC attached, and many times, I stop down the aperture on the f/4G to 6.3-8 anyway, for DOF.
So here’s the situation: I found a deal with a camera shop to swap the f/4G and a few hundred bucks for a 500PF. It’s an extremely limited offer, I have maybe 1 day to decide what I’m going to do...I just don’t want to have any buyer’s remorse, and wish I had kept the f/4G after the fact. I’ve never used a 500PF, but I see the members here who have one rave about it. I’m heavily leaning toward making the deal, I guess I just want some thoughts and opinions from some fellow photographers.
Incidentally, if my big glass was a 600 f/4 instead of a 500, I would simply add the PF to my kit and keep the 600...but I don’t need (or see the practicality of having) TWO 500mm prime lenses. Thank you all in advance for your thoughts and insights.

I am a run and gun bird and critter photographer and hand hold. I have a 500 PF but have never even tried my 1.4 TCEIII on it. Sharp and fast to focus, VR sport takes care of the "jump" that the std VR setting has. For me the 500 PF is lighter than I would like since I hand hold and I prefer a heavier weight forward lens for stability I shot target rifles and sporting clay shot guns and got used to the barrel heavy techniques that I apply to photography so I am different than most. I use my 600 f/4 E more than my 500PF. I use a D500, and D850 and will use my D6 again if the replacement for the mount I bent ever gets in. I have not used the 500 pf on a z camera. Tried to get my wife to try it on her Z50 but she said it is to heavy so she uses her Tamron 100-400 a surprisingly good lens but not in the league with a 500 prime.

 

[Barbara]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

I too had a 500 pf with less than perfect focus, new out of the box. However, instead of asking Nikon service about it, I just sent it to them and got it back working properly. So maybe try another repair place?

 

[splatbass]

I just got one and used it for a week in Glacier National Park. Loved it. I got great shots of grizzlies and black bears among other things. Used it mostly with my d850, but I got a great shot of a grizzly in low light with my D750.

 

[Roy]

I’m seriously considering a 500PF, for the glaringly obvious reasons. My current wildlife lens is a 500mm f/4G, and it’s fantastic, but in many situations, it’s quite cumbersome, even for a huge man like myself. I use it paired to a Z6II/FTZ, with and without a TC14EIII (the majority of the time, the TC is mounted), on a monopod.
I do have a tripod and gimbal, but the vast majority of my shooting is kind of “run and gun”...I hike, and shoot if and when I see something. I don’t typically bring the tripod/gimbal setup and sit in one spot and shoot, so the size and weight of the PF is quite enticing.
Since I’m shooting mirrorless, I’m not concerned with the AF system at f/8 with the TC attached, and many times, I stop down the aperture on the f/4G to 6.3-8 anyway, for DOF.
So here’s the situation: I found a deal with a camera shop to swap the f/4G and a few hundred bucks for a 500PF. It’s an extremely limited offer, I have maybe 1 day to decide what I’m going to do...I just don’t want to have any buyer’s remorse, and wish I had kept the f/4G after the fact. I’ve never used a 500PF, but I see the members here who have one rave about it. I’m heavily leaning toward making the deal, I guess I just want some thoughts and opinions from some fellow photographers.
Incidentally, if my big glass was a 600 f/4 instead of a 500, I would simply add the PF to my kit and keep the 600...but I don’t need (or see the practicality of having) TWO 500mm prime lenses. Thank you all in advance for your thoughts and insights.

Depending on the cost the PF is a much lighter lens.
Only a very minimal compromise in image quality to save the weight.
Personally I prefer the 500mm f4 - A stop faster makes the extra size worth it...

 

[JimmySchoster]

I used a 20mm extension tube to shorten the distance and it worked well. It was used for hummingbirds, butterflies and dragonflies. Nikon D6View attachment 25220

What brand extension tube is your 20 mm?

 

[Karl Gillard]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

Dr. Bob, send it to me and I’ll try it on my cameras for awhile…LOL!

 

[Whiskeyman]

I have a 500 PF that is now a paperweight. Since I got it, I wasn't happy with the focus. I tried everything. AF fine tune etc. I thought it was just my expectations, but was out photographing birds and another photographer showed up with one. I asked if I could take a few images with it and he graciously agreed. I took the same photo with his PF and my PF. When I got back to the computer, there was a clear difference in focus. Mine was slightly blurry. I emailed Nikon Service about the problem and after a month of emails back and forth claiming it was my settings, they agreed to have me send it in. Long story short, they claim there was nothing wrong with the lens. Sent it back. It now sits in the closet unused. One of these days, I will rent one from a local camera store and do a really fine comparison.

Have you tried this len's performance on another camera? If not, try to do so if you can. Do you have a camera store (a real one) that sells Nikon nearby? If you do, I'd take the camera and lens in and let them look at it. If not, look for one wth next time you travel.

It's painful to do this if you can't resolve the issue, but an instance like this calls for sending the camera and lens into Nikon for a "system" check. (How long ago was your lens sent into Nikon Service?) If I had this problem, I'd call Nikon and explain it up the supervisory chain until I either exhausted the chain or got the resolution I wanted. That is too much money to spend on a paperweight. Nikon should be better than that!

BTW, the URL in your profile rwphotostudio seems to no longer be active. Do you have another?

 

[AnnetteJane]

As a person who likes hiking up mountains, I understand the desire for less weight. I got the 500 5.6 pf this year for that very reason. Also for travel. However, f4 would be so nice. I can understand your dilemma. Thankfully I can’t afford an f4 lens I recommend renting one first and see if you like it.. that’s what I did. Some shots below with the Z7 and 500 5.6

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[Squatch]

As a person who likes hiking up mountains, I understand the desire for less weight. I got the 500 5.6 pf this year for that very reason. Also for travel. However, f4 would be so nice. I can understand your dilemma. Thankfully I can’t afford an f4 lens I recommend renting one first and see if you like it.. that’s what I did. Some shots below with the Z7 and 500 5.6View attachment 25610View attachment 25611View attachment 25612

OMG, that Harlequin duck is amazing!!! Beautiful shots.

 

[Woodpecker]

I’m seriously considering a 500PF, for the glaringly obvious reasons. My current wildlife lens is a 500mm f/4G, and it’s fantastic, but in many situations, it’s quite cumbersome, even for a huge man like myself. I use it paired to a Z6II/FTZ, with and without a TC14EIII (the majority of the time, the TC is mounted), on a monopod.

Answer is simple: If you can get a 500PF, get it. It is absolutely great ! I use it on a D850 and d D4s and it renders top results .
But still I wouldn't give my 500 f/4G away for it for two reasons:

1. Despite of its age the old 500 f4 is still one of the best super tele primes being affordable for people not having a cash cow in the stable and not being too heavy.
2. The one stop of light more can make a big difference in two ways
   1. In real low light it can save you the shot, because especially with high ISO one stop can make a huge difference in noise.
   2. For objects other than slo mo targets the 500PF will most likely limit you to 500mm. If you combine it with a TC you end up with a f8 lens and thus most of your AF sensors are forced to hanging around doing nothing. The 500Pf with a TC-14Ex is technically a f8 lens and only 15 of the 153 AF sensorsd of a D850 stay alive.
      This is where the 500 f/4g with TC has a clear advantage, because you have 700 mm f/5.6 with all AF sensors working.

That's why alson in my case the TC-14E II is more or less glued to the 500 f4 .

 

[BillW]

Answer is simple: If you can get a 500PF, get it. It is absolutely great ! I use it on a D850 and d D4s and it renders top results .
But still I wouldn't give my 500 f/4G away for it for two reasons:

1. Despite of its age the old 500 f4 is still one of the best super tele primes being affordable for people not having a cash cow in the stable and not being too heavy.
2. The one stop of light more can make a big difference in two ways
   1. In real low light it can save you the shot, because especially with high ISO one stop can make a huge difference in noise.
   2. For objects other than slo mo targets the 500PF will most likely limit you to 500mm. If you combine it with a TC you end up with a f8 lens and thus most of your AF sensors are forced to hanging around doing nothing. The 500Pf with a TC-14Ex is technically a f8 lens and only 15 of the 153 AF sensorsd of a D850 stay alive.
      This is where the 500 f/4g with TC has a clear advantage, because you have 700 mm f/5.6 with all AF sensors working.

That's why alson in my case the TC-14E II is more or less glued to the 500 f4 .

Sounds like Squatch would use the 500 mm PF on a Z6II body. All the autofocus points on a Z body will work with an f8 or even f11 lens plus TC combination. I have used my 500 mm PF initially on a Z7 and Z6 and now on a Z7II and Z6II. On these bodies, the 500 mm PF works quite well with the 1.4x TCIII, 1.7x TC II and 2x TCIII. All the autofocus points work across the frame. I have even photographed larger birds in flight (for example, swans, bald eagles, sandhill cranes, great blue herons, great egrets) with the 500 mm PF and the 1.4x and 1.7x. I find the 2x slows AF enough that I don’t use it for BIF.