P
philippe
Guest
.
Last edited by a moderator:
500PF 1.4x or 800PF?
- Thread starter Pat Cassity
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
fcotterill
Well-known member
[Edited] A Telephoto works best within a defined distance range, contingent on the size of the subject, and how the photographer seeks to frame and depict the animal. Framing varies from Animalscapes to tightly framed portraits.
Thus, the subject distance, its size and angle of view are key variables. Behaviour and habitats of Subjects are equally if not more important. The diversity of subjects and scenes, of interest to the photographer, determines the lens(es) selected.
Thus - alongside shorter lenses - I like the 800mm focal length and its 1000, 1120 and 1600 derivatives, because their Reach makes possible to frame what are otherwise impossible subjects - in the context one seeks to image. These are not only small carnivores, rodents and birds, but also larger more elusive mammals far way.....
Tight Depth of Field is yet another powerful tool, as in how I like the very tight focus on the Dwarf Mongoose's eyes and forehead (with debris) draws attention to a curious distinction about the subject. This prompts questions, and tells the proverbial story in a picture... I also have some pleasing keepers - in wider framing - of other members in this chap's troop grooming and fossicking on the long island, which created an elevated Island for these small carnivores in long grass. I used the 180-400 TC at different focal lengths to frame two or more mongooses, and with deeper DOF.
You can use a tight DOF from close to far with telephotos, eg 200 f2, 400 f2.8, 800 f5.6, 1120 f9..... Not only the subject but the story being told are key factors in these choices.
So the appropriate lens for respective tasks. But ymmv....
Ultimately, we should strive to use a lens as a creative tool.
Thus, the subject distance, its size and angle of view are key variables. Behaviour and habitats of Subjects are equally if not more important. The diversity of subjects and scenes, of interest to the photographer, determines the lens(es) selected.
Thus - alongside shorter lenses - I like the 800mm focal length and its 1000, 1120 and 1600 derivatives, because their Reach makes possible to frame what are otherwise impossible subjects - in the context one seeks to image. These are not only small carnivores, rodents and birds, but also larger more elusive mammals far way.....
Tight Depth of Field is yet another powerful tool, as in how I like the very tight focus on the Dwarf Mongoose's eyes and forehead (with debris) draws attention to a curious distinction about the subject. This prompts questions, and tells the proverbial story in a picture... I also have some pleasing keepers - in wider framing - of other members in this chap's troop grooming and fossicking on the long island, which created an elevated Island for these small carnivores in long grass. I used the 180-400 TC at different focal lengths to frame two or more mongooses, and with deeper DOF.
You can use a tight DOF from close to far with telephotos, eg 200 f2, 400 f2.8, 800 f5.6, 1120 f9..... Not only the subject but the story being told are key factors in these choices.
So the appropriate lens for respective tasks. But ymmv....
Ultimately, we should strive to use a lens as a creative tool.
Last edited:
O
Well-known member
TCs and long lenses or Primes, the results vary endlessly...............
Just got my 800 Yah!!!!
First test shot from my porch to some song birds was terrible do to heat shimmer. So my wife pictured me to make sure the lens is working… Ordered a replacement foot and will try again tomorrow.
Funny part was 800 wasn’t enough… So I switched to DX instead of messing with a TC. I also mistakenly touched the front element with my hands, I looked at the lens and thought to myself, “Man this is SO huge, I could use it a soup bowl..”
First test shot from my porch to some song birds was terrible do to heat shimmer. So my wife pictured me to make sure the lens is working… Ordered a replacement foot and will try again tomorrow.
Funny part was 800 wasn’t enough… So I switched to DX instead of messing with a TC. I also mistakenly touched the front element with my hands, I looked at the lens and thought to myself, “Man this is SO huge, I could use it a soup bowl..”
I think about selling the 500pf while it’s worth more. With the 800pf, if I need 500mm reach (was 90% never enough) I can use the 70-200 with the 2xTC. And wait patiently for Nikon to announce the 200-600 and decide then.
Congratulations on your 800mm. My experience with the 800mm is it's best for making subjects large in the frame - not for extremely distant subjects. I've used it with the 1.4 TC and it's very good with enough light. But you need to use very good technique. The lens is light enough that is can be handheld, but on a tripod that means you need the added mass of a hand across the lens barrel to minimize any vibration.
I have to give credit to Nikon for releasing this lens for mirrorless. The electronic shutter helps to minimize vibration - and at 800mm and longer that's important.
I do find myself a bit one dimensional with the 800mm PF. I shoot almost exclusively frame filling shots. That means a 400, 200-600, or something similar for the middle range is useful. Now is a good time to sell the 500 PF - and to buy it if still using F-mount. It's a very good lens. But if you own the 800mm, you no longer need the 500mm for the long end so it has a different role for intermediate range shots. I found it a bit long for that role.
Thanks!
Selling the 500pf in mint condition with all accessories - aka highest rating is only fetching around $1,700.
I feel like I’m giving it away for free.
Last edited by a moderator:
I passed on the 800 recently, opting for a mint second hand 500Pf while I enjoy it +/- 1.4 TC. Great value as I can’t lose. I couldn’t quite justify the £ $ for the 800, though it is very well priced for what it is. I’d prefer to clarify my needs using the 500 and seeing how well the 200-600 pans out.
(But part of me wishes I’d gone for the 800!!!!)
A gift to charity instead, is the plan….
Larry Shuman
Well-known member
What is the minimum focus distanc eof the 800 PF?
I think 16 feet. Any closer and the subject would clip the frame
Joel is correct - at 16 feet it is 0.16x. It's not a close up lens even with extension tubes. The value is more for distant subjects. - 20-50 feet or more.