Moving on: Better lenses for D500 or going mirrorless?

[vulpess]

Hi everybody,

My name is Lukas and I am a 27 year old hobby nature photographer. The last two years or so, I have mostly taken bird photos and I am now struggling a bit with knowing how to move forwards with regards to lenses and a possible move to a mirrorless system.
A quick backstory: I started photography with the Pentax K system and in the end used the K-3II with the optically wonderful but extremely slow Pentax 300 f4. In spring last year, my camera needed a repair in while waiting for the return of my camera, I jumped on a used Nikon D500 and finally sold all my Pentax gear for the Nikon. Now I am using the D500 with a Tamron 150-600 G2 (and the surprisingly good AF-P 70-300 FX for when I need less weight).
To begin with I was extremely impressed with the Tamron. Focus speed was not too impressive but the image quality was outstanding when the focus was spot on. However, more recently, I have found more and more situations where I felt that the lens let me down in decisive moments, in a way that either the focus speed was simply too slow or that focus was not precise enough. The latter case would often be that I shoot bursts of a stationary (small) bird and only find a small percentage of the shots to be in focus, meaning the AF-C was wondering about and not really finding a stable lock on the subject. Due to this, I feel that I can't really trust that I manage good focus even though the camera seems to have a good lock on.

I am now not really sure on what I want or need to regain confidence in my camera and lens combination to pull of perfect focus in situations where I only have one shot.

1. I shoot the 150-600 wide open at f6.3 which results in pretty shallow DoF. Is it maybe almost impossible to nail focus all the time with such focal lengths? I have been looking a bit at the 500 PF. How much of a confidence boost would this lens give me with such shallow DoF? Would it be a noticeable difference or not really? In other words, am I expecting too much of the Tamron that also more expensive (and first party) lenses would not be much better at?

2. I have the chance to buy a used Nikon 300 2.8 VR for a reasonable price. Having used a 300 f4 a lot, the ability of using a 2.8 fascinates me. However, having used 600mm for a while now, I reckon, I would want to use some teleconverters with the 300mm. I have read quite different opinions on the 1.7x and 2x TCs with regard to AF speed and image quality, so I am really unsure whether using one of the two longer TCs would actually give me any advantages compared to the 150-600 (which again, I find good optically).

3. Looking at videos showcasing tracking modes and bird (eye) AF in recent mirrorless models makes me fancying a move to a mirrorless system. I really like the Z6II and some of the Z lenses, however, I feel that as of today, I would not be gaining anything in terms of AF compared to my D500.
I liked the rumours prior to the Sony A7 IV release and was kind of preparing to go for a A7 IV + 200-600 combination, however, the limitation of 5 fps and the more video-centric look of the camera stopped that feeling.
The Canon R6 also looks fascinating in terms of AF, however, I don't know what lens I would pair the camera with as the RF 100-500 is out of my league financially and the two f11 primes don't seem to appealing as the only lenses to own.
I see that I potentially could get a used A9 for around the same price as the A7 IV new. So maybe that would be the best entry into the Sony system. However, I find it quite difficult to tell exactly what features the the A9 now has with recent firmware updates. It gained "Animal eye AF" according to Sony with the latest firmware update. Does this also apply to birds or only mammals? Are the A1 and A7 IV the only alternatives for real bird eye AF?

I am sorry for writing such a long post and mostly just rambling on about my thoughts without actually knowing what kind of response I want from you guys.

Maybe I can put it like this: Do you think buying a better lens (300PF, 500PF, 300 2.8 + TC) would give more confidence and trust in the D500 and would put off me thinking of Sony or Canon mirrorless? The dream would be Nikon releasing a mirrorless D500 ...

Cheers,
Lukas

 

[Ralph]

Hi everybody,

My name is Lukas and I am a 27 year old hobby nature photographer. The last two years or so, I have mostly taken bird photos and I am now struggling a bit with knowing how to move forwards with regards to lenses and a possible move to a mirrorless system.
A quick backstory: I started photography with the Pentax K system and in the end used the K-3II with the optically wonderful but extremely slow Pentax 300 f4. In spring last year, my camera needed a repair in while waiting for the return of my camera, I jumped on a used Nikon D500 and finally sold all my Pentax gear for the Nikon. Now I am using the D500 with a Tamron 150-600 G2 (and the surprisingly good AF-P 70-300 FX for when I need less weight).
To begin with I was extremely impressed with the Tamron. Focus speed was not too impressive but the image quality was outstanding when the focus was spot on. However, more recently, I have found more and more situations where I felt that the lens let me down in decisive moments, in a way that either the focus speed was simply too slow or that focus was not precise enough. The latter case would often be that I shoot bursts of a stationary (small) bird and only find a small percentage of the shots to be in focus, meaning the AF-C was wondering about and not really finding a stable lock on the subject. Due to this, I feel that I can't really trust that I manage good focus even though the camera seems to have a good lock on.

I am now not really sure on what I want or need to regain confidence in my camera and lens combination to pull of perfect focus in situations where I only have one shot.

1. I shoot the 150-600 wide open at f6.3 which results in pretty shallow DoF. Is it maybe almost impossible to nail focus all the time with such focal lengths? I have been looking a bit at the 500 PF. How much of a confidence boost would this lens give me with such shallow DoF? Would it be a noticeable difference or not really? In other words, am I expecting too much of the Tamron that also more expensive (and first party) lenses would not be much better at?

2. I have the chance to buy a used Nikon 300 2.8 VR for a reasonable price. Having used a 300 f4 a lot, the ability of using a 2.8 fascinates me. However, having used 600mm for a while now, I reckon, I would want to use some teleconverters with the 300mm. I have read quite different opinions on the 1.7x and 2x TCs with regard to AF speed and image quality, so I am really unsure whether using one of the two longer TCs would actually give me any advantages compared to the 150-600 (which again, I find good optically).

3. Looking at videos showcasing tracking modes and bird (eye) AF in recent mirrorless models makes me fancying a move to a mirrorless system. I really like the Z6II and some of the Z lenses, however, I feel that as of today, I would not be gaining anything in terms of AF compared to my D500.
I liked the rumours prior to the Sony A7 IV release and was kind of preparing to go for a A7 IV + 200-600 combination, however, the limitation of 5 fps and the more video-centric look of the camera stopped that feeling.
The Canon R6 also looks fascinating in terms of AF, however, I don't know what lens I would pair the camera with as the RF 100-500 is out of my league financially and the two f11 primes don't seem to appealing as the only lenses to own.
I see that I potentially could get a used A9 for around the same price as the A7 IV new. So maybe that would be the best entry into the Sony system. However, I find it quite difficult to tell exactly what features the the A9 now has with recent firmware updates. It gained "Animal eye AF" according to Sony with the latest firmware update. Does this also apply to birds or only mammals? Are the A1 and A7 IV the only alternatives for real bird eye AF?

I am sorry for writing such a long post and mostly just rambling on about my thoughts without actually knowing what kind of response I want from you guys.

Maybe I can put it like this: Do you think buying a better lens (300PF, 500PF, 300 2.8 + TC) would give more confidence and trust in the D500 and would put off me thinking of Sony or Canon mirrorless? The dream would be Nikon releasing a mirrorless D500 ...

Cheers,
Lukas

Lucas, How does the 70-300 do with focus lock and sharpness? If it is quick and reliable than your issue is with the lens not the D500. Did you try calibrating the 150-600? That could be the issue. If you haven’t than give that a try before you invest in more lenses. I can’t comment on the mirrorless issue but I can tell you a little about the D500. I have the same 70-300 as you do and it focuses extremely fast and sharp on my D500. I have also been shooting the 500 PF for more than a year and it also focuses extremely fast and the quality of the photos is everything I could ever ask for. Recently I have been trying a 1.4x extender on it and while it has its limitations, I’m very happy with the results. It must be used in good light . If you read through some of the threads on this forum you will see that the 500 PF and the D500 are used by many of the photographers with great success. I highly recommend it.
There has been a great of discussion on mirrorless cameras so you my want to read through those threads before you make any decisions. Personally, I’m taking a wait and see attitude. At some point I will take the plunge but not yet.There are definitely some nice advantages to mirrorless cameras but nothing that will convince me to switch at this time. The D500 is a great camera.

 

[bleirer]

You have a lot to unpack. It will be interesting to see the responses. One factor is that the d500 is a crop camera and so far mirrorless has mostly been full frame. So you will lose some of the reach you are used to.

 

[Steve W]

I agree with Ralph, the D500 is a very capable camera. Whilst you were initially satisfied with performance using the Tamron 150-600 your skills or your expectations have advanced and you now find it wanting. It doesn’t matter whether it’s DSLR or mirrorless..... good glass is probably the most important.

 

[FB101]

there is a lot to cover here but some really good questions.

First the D500 and Tamron G2 is a very good combo. That’s the bear that rekindled my love for wildlife photography but it has its challenges to get the most out of it.
First, because you are dealing with a DX sensor, the equivalent field of view is really 900mm so you need to have your very best technique to make sure you get sharp photos from a handheld 900mm.
1. keep shutter speed above 1/1000s at all times if handheld and that lens being front heavy i personally used 1/1600 as often as light permits.
2. Use the stabilizer in mode 1 when shooting static subjects and mode 2 for BIF. Avoid mode 3 which doesnt stabilize the image during AF acquisition therefore making the AF module’s job that much harder
3. Practice your best stance and holding techniques, brace against solid ibjects
4. prefer the Center AF points - at f6.3 the peripheral points struggle. If static subject use the single centre point and if shooting BIF use group - I know, all the other options work too, but with that combo you need to try to be as precise in AF point placement as possible.
5. Heat haze is a massive image quality killer with a 900mm equivalent lens. Because the reach is so great people think they can take sharp pictures of subjects further away but heat haze will destroy sharpness in a second. So keep subjects close unless the air very still and there is not distortion.

So don’t give up on the Tamron G2, it’s an awesome lens but it’s demanding to give its best.

But I ended up buying a 500pf too. It’s much lighter and easier to handhold, it’s faster to focus and it doesn’t hunt as much. You will still be shooting a 750mm field of view lens on that D500 so the proper technique still applies. its really hard not to fall in love with the 500pf but there are a few bad copies floating around so test before buying used.

The 300 f:2.8 is a great lens but you will have the 1.4TC glued to it at all times, and I am not a fan of the 1.7x. The 2X is actually optically better and you’ll get image quality reasonably close to the 500pf But AF speed will be slower than the 500pf. I just have always lived by the rule of buying the lens with the focal closest to what I shoot the most because TCs no matter how good, are always a compromise (a useful one for sure when needed, but not as your base system).

Finally the mirrorless question. Remember that the D500 being DX you get the benefit of a 1.5x focal length equivalent increase (or another way to think about it is the pixel density of a 50MP full frame camera). So to go from DX to FX, without a meaningful loss in “reach” you need at least 45MP. If you never crop your D500 pictures and feel you could get closer to your subjects if you needed to, then that won’t be an issue. If you feel that getting a frame filling shot is already difficult, then FF cameras with 20-24MP will make it even harder.

That said, assuming you can get a third of the way closer to your subjects, the R6 is a stellar camera that will exceed the D500 in every way but you are right, the only lens option is the 100-500 which has its own challenges. The other option with canon would be to adapt a used 500 f:4 as adapted lenses work very well.

The A7iv has some compromises to shoot wildlife, they are manageable, possibly, but nobody has tried so I wouldn’t rush there quite yet.

The A9 is excellent. It does have animal eye AF but not bird eye AF yet, so keep that in mind. But zone AF with tracking is already a big upgrade over the D500 even without bird eye AF. The 200-600 is quickly becoming my favorite long zoom of all times. It is sharp, fast and internal zooming is a joy to use. It is heavier than a 500pf but very similar to the G2 (and better balanced).
If you are ready to change brand then that’s your best option right now but in your shoes I’d wait until after the announcement of the z9 to see if Nikon truly releases the big z6/7ii AF upgrade everybody hopes for. That would make those 2 cameras your best option, but up to now the Tamron G2 really doesn’t work well on those camera with the FTZ adapter (the 500pf much better but not as good as the D500 with a few caveats).

So my advice? Be patient for a few more weeks, see if you can wring that extra performance the G2 is capable of and if you really want to change, pick between z6/7ii and A9 based on how much improvement Nikon has delivered in that period of time.

FWIW I did not follow my own advice and I am blissfully using an A1 and 200-600 now, but it doesn’t mean changing is right for you.

 

[sid_19911991]

Hi everybody,

My name is Lukas and I am a 27 year old hobby nature photographer. The last two years or so, I have mostly taken bird photos and I am now struggling a bit with knowing how to move forwards with regards to lenses and a possible move to a mirrorless system.
A quick backstory: I started photography with the Pentax K system and in the end used the K-3II with the optically wonderful but extremely slow Pentax 300 f4. In spring last year, my camera needed a repair in while waiting for the return of my camera, I jumped on a used Nikon D500 and finally sold all my Pentax gear for the Nikon. Now I am using the D500 with a Tamron 150-600 G2 (and the surprisingly good AF-P 70-300 FX for when I need less weight).
To begin with I was extremely impressed with the Tamron. Focus speed was not too impressive but the image quality was outstanding when the focus was spot on. However, more recently, I have found more and more situations where I felt that the lens let me down in decisive moments, in a way that either the focus speed was simply too slow or that focus was not precise enough. The latter case would often be that I shoot bursts of a stationary (small) bird and only find a small percentage of the shots to be in focus, meaning the AF-C was wondering about and not really finding a stable lock on the subject. Due to this, I feel that I can't really trust that I manage good focus even though the camera seems to have a good lock on.

I am now not really sure on what I want or need to regain confidence in my camera and lens combination to pull of perfect focus in situations where I only have one shot.

1. I shoot the 150-600 wide open at f6.3 which results in pretty shallow DoF. Is it maybe almost impossible to nail focus all the time with such focal lengths? I have been looking a bit at the 500 PF. How much of a confidence boost would this lens give me with such shallow DoF? Would it be a noticeable difference or not really? In other words, am I expecting too much of the Tamron that also more expensive (and first party) lenses would not be much better at?

2. I have the chance to buy a used Nikon 300 2.8 VR for a reasonable price. Having used a 300 f4 a lot, the ability of using a 2.8 fascinates me. However, having used 600mm for a while now, I reckon, I would want to use some teleconverters with the 300mm. I have read quite different opinions on the 1.7x and 2x TCs with regard to AF speed and image quality, so I am really unsure whether using one of the two longer TCs would actually give me any advantages compared to the 150-600 (which again, I find good optically).

3. Looking at videos showcasing tracking modes and bird (eye) AF in recent mirrorless models makes me fancying a move to a mirrorless system. I really like the Z6II and some of the Z lenses, however, I feel that as of today, I would not be gaining anything in terms of AF compared to my D500.
I liked the rumours prior to the Sony A7 IV release and was kind of preparing to go for a A7 IV + 200-600 combination, however, the limitation of 5 fps and the more video-centric look of the camera stopped that feeling.
The Canon R6 also looks fascinating in terms of AF, however, I don't know what lens I would pair the camera with as the RF 100-500 is out of my league financially and the two f11 primes don't seem to appealing as the only lenses to own.
I see that I potentially could get a used A9 for around the same price as the A7 IV new. So maybe that would be the best entry into the Sony system. However, I find it quite difficult to tell exactly what features the the A9 now has with recent firmware updates. It gained "Animal eye AF" according to Sony with the latest firmware update. Does this also apply to birds or only mammals? Are the A1 and A7 IV the only alternatives for real bird eye AF?

I am sorry for writing such a long post and mostly just rambling on about my thoughts without actually knowing what kind of response I want from you guys.

Maybe I can put it like this: Do you think buying a better lens (300PF, 500PF, 300 2.8 + TC) would give more confidence and trust in the D500 and would put off me thinking of Sony or Canon mirrorless? The dream would be Nikon releasing a mirrorless D500 ...

Cheers,
Lukas

I suggest you give the different combos a go before buying them.

It will also depend on your shooting style too.

In terms of sensor performance Sony A7 iv is the best of the options you have mentioned.
Its dynamic range & ISO performance is not just class leading, but is way better than Sony A9.

Now the AF is supposed to be very good too. It has the same chip & AI software as that of A1.

Plus the 200-600 Sony in my experience is way sharper than the 500pf.

The 500pf will give you better 3d rendition, but when you don't fill the frame, and have to crop in, the sharpness is not the best. But with the 200-600, it is so sharp that one can crop in 70% & still get an excellent image. But the images from this lens will appear more flattish (not as flat as Nikkor 200-500). My friend uses a A7 iii & 200-600, it always outperforms my D500/Z6ii/500 pf combo significantly in image quality. There are many who shoot quick bird action like swallows in-flight on 200-600 & A1. So, I am sure AF won't be an issue.

Sony A7 iii has dual gain ISO. I think A7 4 will likely have it too.

However, the 200-600 zoom, allows you compose images well. 500-pf AF is very fast & limits your composition. Sony 200-600 is no slouch in AF (way better than Tamron 150-600 g2) & offers superior sharpness & composition flexibility.

According to Fronowsphotos Sony A7 4 gives you 6 fps at the best quality. I will always settle for the best image quality despite a slightly lower than optimal FPS.

You seemed to suggest that you are not big on video. I wasn't too.
But now I like taking wildlife videos more than photos. I recently videographed a black shouldered kite successfully hovering & hunting a mouse.

A lot of still wildlife shooters will eventually dabble into video, IMO. You may develop that interest too. So it is nice to have a hybrid camera. When one shoots in slow mo, the video footage gets effectively stabilized, so one can shoot action videos. Like a raptor landing or a cheetah sprinting etc.

Unlike Z6 ii, Sony A7 4 gives extremely sharp video footage at 4k 60 FPS 1.5x crop.

So on a 200-600, you can shoot 900 mm 4k video. Imagine shooting a video of a still bird etc. It has 10-bit internal raw too. You can colour grade them. It will look beautful even at 8-bit raw.

One can shoot high quality video even in sub optimal light...

Canon is a big no from my end. The low dynamic range canon sensors & colour noise performance are a turn off.

I have never used a Nikkor 300 f2.8. I think the focal length is an issue for birding here.

I am considering selling my Z6 ii & 500pf for Sony A7 4 & 200-600.

I am currently interested in getting the best image quality, composition flexibility, lens sharpness for copping, & sharp video footage.

So the Sony combo for me does the job.

I will continue to use nikkor 70-200 f2.8 with my d500 for close range mammals & habitat shots.

As I said, depending on your shooting style & expectations from the gear you choose one over the other.

 

[fcotterill]

I would first check AF tuning. A quick test is to shoot a fine-scaled ruler (I use an 6" stainless engineering" rule) lifted at far end so at a shallow incline to the horizontal axis of the lens. This can reveal how much bursts are varying, which could also reveal shooting technique ie wavering if handholding. If you are using BBAF, keep AF-On pressed in all the time as you squeeze off on the shutter. So test this on and off a rigid tripod.
Sigma have their AF tuning app that uses a docking station, but I'm not sure if Tamron has similar (?) I've read this allows tuning a zoom at different focal lengths - a feature Nikon have finally introduced but only in the D6.
Can only endorse the D500 further. It is indeed a very capable camera; mine scored me many keepers It is still rated the best value in DX, almost 5 years since launched. One gets a Pro camera for remarkably low RRP, and it is one of the most ideal cameras for wildlife photography, provided one keeps ISO under 3200, preferable in 3 digit zone, and obviously it suffers cropping poorly. The Pro specs in Photo shooting and Custom menus and extended customization options are also real positives.

As is well known, the IQ of the Z6 and Z7 sensors is superior, and Z6 gets close to the D5 for lowlight capabilities, but all versions are not designed for challenging wildlife subjects (active and/or against clutter). My personal gripe is the inability to switch AF modes efficiently on all the Zeds, which cripples them in the conditions I work in. With easy amenable subjects in more open sscenes the Zeds are excellent, especially as AF is much more precise. A D500 is far superior in most conditions: unless poor light, you need FX resolution, and/or silent shutter.

I also used my D500 intensively with a 300 f2.8G VRII i bought Used, and mostly shot this with TC14 II or TC2 III. IME, TC17 II is only worth using on the 300 f4E PF and 400 f2.8E FL - otherwise don't bother. Your rig has to be AFFT for each TC combination. All Nikon's versions of the 300 f2.8 are excellent optics, and Nikon's designer of these newer exotics - Susumu Sato [see 1001 Nights #67 ]- optimized these exotics to pair well with the TCs. The latest =current version was released with the improved TC2E III. My combo delivered very well as a 600 f5.6 with the D500, Df and D850. But remember any TC rig is intolerant of cropping and stretching the subject distance.

My 0.02c is steer clear of the forum fanned topics of the month ie eye AF and particularly chasing the latest camera. This applies especially to the Mirrorless arena, where the "best" and latest model is going to remain a fast-flying target for some time to come, and . Again I agree with previous members here - rather fine-tune your existing gear. Remember the lenses set the big costs and quality in wildlife photography but this depends primarily on the photographer's skillset. I always remind myself on one of several lessons moving from D500 and Df to a D850 back in 2018. The first images showed up as a distinct shock because the D850 showed up my sloppy handholding on birds....

PS I typed this in between interruptions, so may now be redundant to more recent replies

 

[bleirer]

To a degree your gear matters. You will never get the performance of a $12000 lens out of a $1200 lens. And a $1500 body is not going to match a $6000 body. But you have a solid camera and a reasonable lens, and you can still maximize the gear you do have by taking an inventory of your choices for camers settings, your shooting technique, use of tripod or monopod, and your post processing technique. For me there is always something I could do better.

 

[sid_19911991]

I own a D500, Tamron 150-600 A011, Nikon AF-P 70-300, Nikon 200-500, and 500 PF

I bought a Sony A1and 200-600mm G and it is perfect for my current needs as far as I am concerned. Picks up and locks on to small birds like glue without hesitation. I have zero interest in shooting the D500 again. The 500 PF is a nice compact lightweight lens but I prefer the performance of the Sony200-600 even with the extra size and weight.

Wow, great to hear that as I am considering buying A7 4/200-600.

I have a few questions.

1) In your experience, which lens is sharper especially at far off distances? 500pf or Sony 200-600.

I found the 200-600 to be significantly sharper.

2) What do you mean when you say you prefer the performance of the 200-600?

3) How is the initial target acquisition of birds in flight when compared to the 500 pf/d500 combo?

4) What sort of AF do you use on the Sony? Zone or real time tracking. Ir there any other other mode which works better?

 

[vulpess]

Wow, thank you all so much for some very good responses (way better than I could expect based on the chaotic post of mine!)
I will try to comment on the most things using quotes:

How does the 70-300 do with focus lock and sharpness? If it is quick and reliable than your issue is with the lens not the D500.

I was way more confident using the 70-300, yes! I felt that one didn't go back and forth when on a subject than the Tamron. And yes, I don't think my D500 is faulty, it is more a question of whether the 70-300 really is much better or whether that's mostly due to the difference in focal length.

You have a lot to unpack. It will be interesting to see the responses. One factor is that the d500 is a crop camera and so far mirrorless has mostly been full frame. So you will lose some of the reach you are used to.

Yes, I agree that there is a lot going on. I just felt l needed to get my thoughts down in writing in some way since I was going back and forth so much in my head And I agree that the DX vs FX thing is adding to the complexity. I wouldn't mind going to FX, however, then I would want to have at least 500mm, preferably 600mm which is quite hard to obtain in mirrorless on a tight budget.

First, because you are dealing with a DX sensor, the equivalent field of view is really 900mm so you need to have your very best technique to make sure you get sharp photos from a handheld 900mm.

Really good point! I used to shoot handheld with 1/1200 or more without VC or with VC when at longer shutter speeds. I recently bought a monopod and use this along with a Wimberley Sidekick.
Regarding AF points, I mostly use Single point AF and hardly ever leave the center. I use to joystick to switch to group AF for BIF.

The A7iv has some compromises to shoot wildlife, they are manageable, possibly, but nobody has tried so I wouldn’t rush there quite yet.

That's a good point, there surely will be some reviews out soon

The A9 is excellent. It does have animal eye AF but not bird eye AF yet, so keep that in mind. But zone AF with tracking is already a big upgrade over the D500 even without bird eye AF

Thanks for that clarification! I agree, the Sony RTT even without bird eye AF seems really good.

So my advice? Be patient for a few more weeks, see if you can wring that extra performance the G2 is capable of and if you really want to change, pick between z6/7ii and A9 based on how much improvement Nikon has delivered in that period of time

That may very well be the best and most reasonable advice. Especially since budget is limited and changing system might give me other compromises.

FWIW I did not follow my own advice and I am blissfully using an A1 and 200-600 now, but it doesn’t mean changing is right for you.

Haha, I certainly would do the same thing if funds would allow it!

I suggest you give the different combos a go before buying them.

I would love to, but here in Norway, possibilities for that are almost non-existent and I have no camera stores close by :(
Thank you for your input regarding the Sony, makes me want to go for that system

I would first check AF tuning.

I have adjusted AF using the Tamron USB dock for different focal lengths and focusing distances. So I think, I have that part of the equation covered

Can only endorse the D500 further. It is indeed a very capable camera; mine scored me many keepers

Good to know! I don't really question the abilities of the D500 as they are so well documented by many! I am just trying to figure out how I can get most out of it. Probably comes down to individual skill level (that surely could be higher than it is) and quite demanding conditions at effectively 900mm and a lot of times bad lighting.

I also used my D500 intensively with a 300 f2.8G VRII i bought Used, and mostly shot this with TC14 II or TC2 III.

Thank you for the input regarding the 300 2.8! Sound promising that you enjoyed using it with the TCs as well. Do you have any comparisons to other lenses with regard to AF speed with the TCs attached?

I bought a Sony A1and 200-600mm G and it is perfect for my current needs as far as I am concerned. Picks up and locks on to small birds like glue without hesitation. I have zero interest in shooting the D500 again. The 500 PF is a nice compact lightweight lens but I prefer the performance of the Sony200-600 even with the extra size and weight.

Thanks! Your comment neither puts a stopper for my wish to go mirrorless Oh well, I really should try and compare some options myself!

To a degree your gear matters. You will never get the performance of a $12000 lens out of a $1200 lens. And a $1500 body is not going to match a $6000 body. But you have a solid camera and a reasonable lens, and you can still maximize the gear you do have by taking an inventory of your choices for camers settings, your shooting technique, use of tripod or monopod, and your post processing technique. For me there is always something I could do better.

Thanks for that down to earth comment! And yes, I agree, I certainly have a lot of room for improvements when it comes to composition, patience in trying to find and wait for subjects and so on!


I will try to prepare and upload a series of images, showing an example of a situation where I find the AF not be trustworthy, over the weekend.

Cheers so long!

 

[abc123brian]

I think you got a lot of good information so far. The D500 is the only DSLR I currently own as I’ve been a mirrorless shooter for a long time. It is a great DSLR for action and wildlife photography and is probably the best value available today. The 500mm PF is a great lens and you might find you can keep it steadier being so light.

I’m with @FB101 on his recommendations. In addition to what he said, try shooting at about 500mm to see if you notice improvement. Many zooms lose sharpness at max reach. When shooting over long distance, there are many things that can impact image quality. I don’t feel your gear is a limiting factor. You may also want to share some photos in the presentation forum and critique forum to get some feedback.

My opinion on the mirrorless options. Mirrorless has many advantages but, in most cases, disadvantages as well. Until Sony released the A9, focus tracking wasn’t one of them. It was the first mirrorless that got the attention of sports and wildlife shooters. It has some key advantages over other mirrorless options and DSLRs, like blackout free shooting, AF that tracks across the frame, and 20 FPS shooting. Many of these features are still currently limited to only a few mirrorless cameras. The A1 is the camera that get the most attention because it packs all this into a high resolution camera and has better tracking than the A9 did. The second camera that gets a lot of attention is the Canon R5. This camera doesn’t have the stacked sensor that allows the speed of the A1, but still performs very well overall. Many reviewers believe the bird AF is better than Sony’s, but regardless they both perform very well. Nikon has yet to release comparable tracking, but we expect the Z9 to be comparable. The best value today for the money in mirrorless is probably the A9 with the 200-600. They all have some compromises as well. My overall recommendation is be patient for now.

 

[Ralph]

Just to follow up on your question about focal
Length and D500. The D500 is lightning fast focusing with the 500pf. Absolutely no issues.

 

[EricBowles]

Hi Lukas

There is a lot of good advice, but the bottom line is you may need to work on technique with your current gear, and develop more reasonable expectations for distant subjects. If you have unlimited money, you can substitute gear for technique, but it's on the margin and won't make a dramatic difference. Save your money.

Part of technique is related to field craft. With practice, you should get better at being able to approach a distant subject. Focus performance may be fine, but when your subject is 100 meters away or more, you may need to simply learn to get closer. Not every subject you see is close enough to be reasonably photographed without getting closer. You have a crop sensor and a 150-600mm lens - so that's the equivalent of 900mm field of view. That's a lot of magnification and beyond the equivalent focal length you'll see in most published images.

A D500 is an excellent camera - and at a level where most people can get sharp photos with good technique. The Tamron lens is pretty good - not perfect as it is a consumer lens - but good enough that it's not a problem. There are plenty of situations with the best lens where you need to "help" the lens and camera to focus. Part of technique is learning the right focus mode to reduce or eliminate your misses.

I think you can save a lot of money and improve success by learning better technique with your current gear. I would not replace or upgrade anything right now. Probably the best advice right now is to take a lot more photos. Practice focusing on your subject so that error is reduced or eliminated. Speed is only relevant after you have learned to consistently focus accurately on a static subject.

You might start by viewing some of Steve's videos on action photography and how to focus. Then post some images that are successful - and some that did not work as expected so you can get feedback on your progress. Be specific about where you need help so there is not a lot of discussion about secondary issues.

Don't waste money changing cameras or lenses at this stage. The gear is not your issue.

 

[DRwyoming]

There is a lot of good advice, but the bottom line is you may need to work on technique with your current gear, and develop more reasonable expectations for distant subjects...

Spot on advice Eric!

 

[EricBowles]

You might also want to take a look at the work of David Akoubian - a Tamron pro. He's using a variety of Sony and Nikon cameras with the Tamron 150-600 and other similar lenses. You'll see he has been getting great results on photographing small birds in his yard with the 150-600 and Nikon Z7. Earlier he was using a D500 with the same lens.

Bear Woods Happenings

Just another WordPress.com weblog

bearwoodsblog.wordpress.com

 

[abc123brian]

Consistently locking on to tree swallows in flight-
D500 with any 500mm + lens ???
A1, 200-600 100%

The suggestion to learn proper technique is solid. You might be surprised at the difference it can make. Remember how bad you say Nikon Z7 AF was? Check out Mark Smith’s video on the Z7 at launch and see what he was able to do with it. Certain gear can make things a lot easier, but it’s even better in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. Yes, the A1 offers AF and FPS benefits over the D500, but that combination is significantly more expensive.

A1, 200-600 $8500
A9ii, 200-600 $6500
D500, 200-500 $3000
D500, 500PF $5200

 

[Turberticus]

The suggestion to learn proper technique is solid. You might be surprised at the difference it can make. Remember how bad you say Nikon Z7 AF was? Check out Mark Smith’s video on the Z7 at launch and see what he was able to do with it. Certain gear can make things a lot easier, but it’s even better in the hands of someone who knows how to use it. Yes, the A1 offers AF and FPS benefits over the D500, but that combination is significantly more expensive.

A1, 200-600 $8500
A9ii, 200-600 $6500
D500, 200-500 $3000
D500, 500PF $5200

Agree. It's a little weird when people humble brag about their expensive gear (Which OP can't afford) when the conversation has steered away from gear and toward improving ones technique.

 

[EricBowles]

I’m not a professional but I’m fully aware that technique is very important. I also own a D 500 and an A1 and I can tell you that equipment is HUGE!
Unless someone is shooting birds with MF than they must know it also

The original post was about a problem with perched subjects. If money is no object, buy one of each. But the current gear they own should have a 95+% success rate with a static subject. I had a D500 and a D850 and both handled perched subjects without a problem.

 

[Woodyg3]

I have been shooting a D500 since shortly after the camera was introduced. I used both versions of the Tamron 150-600, then the Nikon 200-500, and finally saved enough money to afford a used 500pf. Each step along the way the better glass has resulted in sharper pictures and faster autofocus. But, improved picture quality only happens IF I do my job. Gear is seductive and it's easy to feel that new stuff will solve problems. I know, because I've fallen into that trap in the past. Probably everyone in the forum has.

Technique is huge, and even after being a photographer all my life, I continue to work to figure out ways to improve. So regardless of any gear improvements I am able to make, I always keep this in mind when I'm shooting.

I certainly don't want to try to tell you what you should do in your situation. If you have the money for the 500 pf, it's a great lens and I would certainly recommend glass before camera bodies when trying to improve your picture quality. There is a lot of talk and excitement about the latest mirrorless cameras, and I understand that. But, the D500 is an amazingly good camera and very capable. At this point, to get a mirrorless body and lens for wildlife that will outperform the D500 would be the same as you'd spend on a used car.

 

[sid_19911991]

Sorry just now getting settled in at home to write a reply.

I am by far not the most experienced or knowledgable photographer here but I am willing to share my experiences and contribute where I am able. That said:

I have no proof but I am willing to do side by side comparison shots this weekend. I suspect the Sony is the sharper lens. It could be just my excitement that it always seems to be locked on focus.

Performance- Since it is more or less my walking around setup, I prefer to use a zoom lens and the 1/4 turn throw is perfect. The AF is so smooth and lightning fast I can't describe it. Internal zoom is a great thing for me in this dusty region that I live.


Target acquisistion- again, it goes beyond everything else I have ever personally owned. It just picks up the target and locks on.

I'm still learning and have not spent enough time to really dial in my preferences. But, I am usually walking around in wide with animal or bird eye detect on. I can switch to spot easily on the evf and have shot the moon in manual using evf and timer on a tripod.

To be honest this is the worst year I can remember for birds and other critters, depressing.. I hope to get out this weekend and spend some time with the Sony.

Thank you for sharing your experience using the gear.

 

[Drbobcameraguy]

Hi everybody,

My name is Lukas and I am a 27 year old hobby nature photographer. The last two years or so, I have mostly taken bird photos and I am now struggling a bit with knowing how to move forwards with regards to lenses and a possible move to a mirrorless system.
A quick backstory: I started photography with the Pentax K system and in the end used the K-3II with the optically wonderful but extremely slow Pentax 300 f4. In spring last year, my camera needed a repair in while waiting for the return of my camera, I jumped on a used Nikon D500 and finally sold all my Pentax gear for the Nikon. Now I am using the D500 with a Tamron 150-600 G2 (and the surprisingly good AF-P 70-300 FX for when I need less weight).
To begin with I was extremely impressed with the Tamron. Focus speed was not too impressive but the image quality was outstanding when the focus was spot on. However, more recently, I have found more and more situations where I felt that the lens let me down in decisive moments, in a way that either the focus speed was simply too slow or that focus was not precise enough. The latter case would often be that I shoot bursts of a stationary (small) bird and only find a small percentage of the shots to be in focus, meaning the AF-C was wondering about and not really finding a stable lock on the subject. Due to this, I feel that I can't really trust that I manage good focus even though the camera seems to have a good lock on.

I am now not really sure on what I want or need to regain confidence in my camera and lens combination to pull of perfect focus in situations where I only have one shot.

1. I shoot the 150-600 wide open at f6.3 which results in pretty shallow DoF. Is it maybe almost impossible to nail focus all the time with such focal lengths? I have been looking a bit at the 500 PF. How much of a confidence boost would this lens give me with such shallow DoF? Would it be a noticeable difference or not really? In other words, am I expecting too much of the Tamron that also more expensive (and first party) lenses would not be much better at?

2. I have the chance to buy a used Nikon 300 2.8 VR for a reasonable price. Having used a 300 f4 a lot, the ability of using a 2.8 fascinates me. However, having used 600mm for a while now, I reckon, I would want to use some teleconverters with the 300mm. I have read quite different opinions on the 1.7x and 2x TCs with regard to AF speed and image quality, so I am really unsure whether using one of the two longer TCs would actually give me any advantages compared to the 150-600 (which again, I find good optically).

3. Looking at videos showcasing tracking modes and bird (eye) AF in recent mirrorless models makes me fancying a move to a mirrorless system. I really like the Z6II and some of the Z lenses, however, I feel that as of today, I would not be gaining anything in terms of AF compared to my D500.
I liked the rumours prior to the Sony A7 IV release and was kind of preparing to go for a A7 IV + 200-600 combination, however, the limitation of 5 fps and the more video-centric look of the camera stopped that feeling.
The Canon R6 also looks fascinating in terms of AF, however, I don't know what lens I would pair the camera with as the RF 100-500 is out of my league financially and the two f11 primes don't seem to appealing as the only lenses to own.
I see that I potentially could get a used A9 for around the same price as the A7 IV new. So maybe that would be the best entry into the Sony system. However, I find it quite difficult to tell exactly what features the the A9 now has with recent firmware updates. It gained "Animal eye AF" according to Sony with the latest firmware update. Does this also apply to birds or only mammals? Are the A1 and A7 IV the only alternatives for real bird eye AF?

I am sorry for writing such a long post and mostly just rambling on about my thoughts without actually knowing what kind of response I want from you guys.

Maybe I can put it like this: Do you think buying a better lens (300PF, 500PF, 300 2.8 + TC) would give more confidence and trust in the D500 and would put off me thinking of Sony or Canon mirrorless? The dream would be Nikon releasing a mirrorless D500 ...

Cheers,
Lukas

If you are getting soft images in af-c what group and focus point are you using. I have my D5oo set up with my PV button set to single point af-c my joystick set to group autofocus at a small focus area and my ae AF lock button set to area focus at a medium size focus area. If you are using group or area autofocus the camera maybe focusing on a wingtip instead of the head or eye. I advise you read Steve's book on Nikon autofocus system's and his bird in flight book. The D5oo is very capable of taking excellent pics usually beyond the skill of most photographer's.

 

[Calson]

At this point were you have a modest investment in photo gear it is important to evaluate the entire camera ecosystem and not the current cameras being sold. With nature photography overall my pick would be either Canon or Nikon as they provide the widest number of lens options and well integrated flash and there is far more third party gear made for these two systems. Canon for example has 4 different 400mm lens and Nikon has the 500mm PF and multiple macro lenses and macro flash systems. If all you plan to photograph is large mammals and rodents then any camera will do. But if you want to shoot from boats and small creatures and take advantage of flash, or go underwater for your photography, then the limitations of Sony mirrorless will be apparent.

If I was starting out today the only reason for me to go with Nikon would be the 500mm f/5.6 PF lens adnd their macro gear. I would probably go with Canon and the question would be which cameras to buy. I moved to Nikon in 1988 when I started shooting underwater with the Nikonos cameras and then started using their cameras and lenses both on land and in a housing. I shifted to Canon in 2005 to get cameras with far superior high ISO performance, and then back to Nikon when the D3, 14-24mm, 24-70, and SB-800 speedlight. The deficiencies of the Nikon pro camera made all other aspects moot. That situation does not exist today.

Also important to consider whether to do wildlife videos and this is where again I would go with Canon with their extensive line of cine lenses and video cameras and even if going with RED the lenses chosen would probably be ones from Canon and Cooke.

 

[Ken Miracle]

Hi everybody,

My name is Lukas and I am a 27 year old hobby nature photographer. The last two years or so, I have mostly taken bird photos and I am now struggling a bit with knowing how to move forwards with regards to lenses and a possible move to a mirrorless system.
A quick backstory: I started photography with the Pentax K system and in the end used the K-3II with the optically wonderful but extremely slow Pentax 300 f4. In spring last year, my camera needed a repair in while waiting for the return of my camera, I jumped on a used Nikon D500 and finally sold all my Pentax gear for the Nikon. Now I am using the D500 with a Tamron 150-600 G2 (and the surprisingly good AF-P 70-300 FX for when I need less weight).
To begin with I was extremely impressed with the Tamron. Focus speed was not too impressive but the image quality was outstanding when the focus was spot on. However, more recently, I have found more and more situations where I felt that the lens let me down in decisive moments, in a way that either the focus speed was simply too slow or that focus was not precise enough. The latter case would often be that I shoot bursts of a stationary (small) bird and only find a small percentage of the shots to be in focus, meaning the AF-C was wondering about and not really finding a stable lock on the subject. Due to this, I feel that I can't really trust that I manage good focus even though the camera seems to have a good lock on.

I am now not really sure on what I want or need to regain confidence in my camera and lens combination to pull of perfect focus in situations where I only have one shot.

1. I shoot the 150-600 wide open at f6.3 which results in pretty shallow DoF. Is it maybe almost impossible to nail focus all the time with such focal lengths? I have been looking a bit at the 500 PF. How much of a confidence boost would this lens give me with such shallow DoF? Would it be a noticeable difference or not really? In other words, am I expecting too much of the Tamron that also more expensive (and first party) lenses would not be much better at?

2. I have the chance to buy a used Nikon 300 2.8 VR for a reasonable price. Having used a 300 f4 a lot, the ability of using a 2.8 fascinates me. However, having used 600mm for a while now, I reckon, I would want to use some teleconverters with the 300mm. I have read quite different opinions on the 1.7x and 2x TCs with regard to AF speed and image quality, so I am really unsure whether using one of the two longer TCs would actually give me any advantages compared to the 150-600 (which again, I find good optically).

3. Looking at videos showcasing tracking modes and bird (eye) AF in recent mirrorless models makes me fancying a move to a mirrorless system. I really like the Z6II and some of the Z lenses, however, I feel that as of today, I would not be gaining anything in terms of AF compared to my D500.
I liked the rumours prior to the Sony A7 IV release and was kind of preparing to go for a A7 IV + 200-600 combination, however, the limitation of 5 fps and the more video-centric look of the camera stopped that feeling.
The Canon R6 also looks fascinating in terms of AF, however, I don't know what lens I would pair the camera with as the RF 100-500 is out of my league financially and the two f11 primes don't seem to appealing as the only lenses to own.
I see that I potentially could get a used A9 for around the same price as the A7 IV new. So maybe that would be the best entry into the Sony system. However, I find it quite difficult to tell exactly what features the the A9 now has with recent firmware updates. It gained "Animal eye AF" according to Sony with the latest firmware update. Does this also apply to birds or only mammals? Are the A1 and A7 IV the only alternatives for real bird eye AF?

I am sorry for writing such a long post and mostly just rambling on about my thoughts without actually knowing what kind of response I want from you guys.

Maybe I can put it like this: Do you think buying a better lens (300PF, 500PF, 300 2.8 + TC) would give more confidence and trust in the D500 and would put off me thinking of Sony or Canon mirrorless? The dream would be Nikon releasing a mirrorless D500 ...

Cheers,
Lukas

I have shot a lot of Bird and BIF photos with a D500 and Tamron 150-600 G2 .... best tip I ever had is to clean your contacts on your lens and camera frequently. I use BD Alcohol Swabs ... fold up and squeeze the excess fluid out and then carefully wipe the contacts in one direction. You can also use Deoxit or other similar cleaner with a little dab on a micro fiber cloth. I have had photographers say they needed to have their lens/camera repaired and I cleaned their contacts for them and the camera and lens then worked great. Does not work every time but more often than not. I also use a Tamron 18-400 on the D500 as a walking around lens and hiking in tough terrain with my chukar hunting friends and my wife uses one on her Z50. I also use Nikon 500 PF and a Nikon 600f/4E on the D500 from time to time (usually have the 500pf on D850 and the 600 f/4E on D6.

 

[sid_19911991]

If I do a side by side comparison, what would be a good approach?
I am thinking shoot a static object 50 or 60 feet off my deck and use a tripod with the same settings.
It would have to be D850, 500pf next to A1 200-600mm. 500 against 600mm or dial the Sony at 500?

That's a great idea. Yes please do shoot the Sony at 500mm.

But do make sure the light is slightly dull, else in good light even entry level cameras & non-native zooms perform reasonably well.

I would suggest the subject should be at least 100-120 feet away. Make sure the subject does not fill the frame & do crop in about 50% or so.

Ideally, shoot a pigeon or any common static bird. No point in shooting a static part of a building etc.

 

[Woodyg3]

Not a great day for this, I will have to revisit the idea. I snapped a couple shots of a nest box at 100 feet or so today as a practice. Tripod, AF, Timer, similar settings, f/8, auto iso
Not very good, I will have to try again later.

Nikon D850
500.0 mm f/5.6
ƒ/8.0, 500.0 mm, 1/500, ISO 1100
Sony ILCE-1
FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS
ƒ/8.0, 489.0 mm, 1/500, ISO 1600

It's interesting to see the difference in colors. Do you think it's different white balance, or the way the camera renders color?