500PF Owners a ?

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).

Hatch1921

Hatch1921

Well-known member
Member's gallery
HI all,

I love the 300PF and have my eye on the 500PF. For those of you who own the lens or even rented it.. what do you love/hate about the lens? Do you find F/5.6 suitable for your shooting needs? i gone through a number of threads with amazing images being produced / captured with the lens.

If you own or have shot both the 300 and the 500... is the 500 sharper? Same?

Appreciate the input before I hit the buy button.

Thanks
Hatch
 
Member's gallery
A great lens, really ideal for hand holding. The 300 is just as sharp and even with a 1.4TC almost as good as the 500 but only 420 (both 5.6) so the 500 has the edge. In bright light and good contrast the 500 with a 1.4TC can give excellent results. I am very happy with my 500 on a D850 and D7200.
 
Member's gallery
I used the 300 f4 pf with and without the TC14 for most of my long distance wildlife until I bought the 500 f5.6 pf. The 500 takes about 95% of my images with either the D500 and now the Z6 II. Incredible lens. I have a Nikkor 500 f4 P and the 500 pf is sharper. Great hiking lens and packs well for airline trips. Go for it!
 
Member's gallery
Can't compare it to the 300 pf but compared to the 500 EFL it's pretty good. f5.6 doesn't cause me any issues in use. I tried a 1.4tc on it and didn't like it, had lots of trouble with af on a D6 in bright sun. IQ of the combo isn't acceptable to me.
 
Member's gallery
I love the 500PF - it's one of the reasons I haven't jump ship to Canon or Sony. It's incredibly close to the same sharpness as the big F/4 glass, it focuses fast, it's light, easy to pack and just gets the job done. The big draw however is that it's a 500mm lens that's as easy to hand-hold as a 70-200. Between its weight and size, it allows you to approach in ways that are impossible with larger gear. You're just so much more maneuverable with it. It's easier to change height, get into position, and get the shot.

I did a video review on it as well:

 
Member's gallery
Can't comment about the wonderful 300 as I have not owned or used it.
I recommend the 500 PF to everyone, without reservation. Super lens! I owned the 500 f4G when Brandon of Allen's Camera convinced me I'd like the 500 PF more, and he was right. I sold off the 500G and gained a bit of cash and a better 500mm lens.
 
Member's gallery
Many thanks all for the great comments/feedback. I'm going to give it a try and fingers crossed, I will like it as much as I enjoy shooting the 300PF. Steve, thank you for the video link and the video in general, I've watched it a few times over the past year. :) I will order another foot for the tripod collar, dropping the camera/lens would ugh... be horrible to say the least. Thanks again all :)

Hatch
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I love the 500PF - it's one of the reasons I haven't jump ship to Canon or Sony. It's incredibly close to the same sharpness as the big F/4 glass, it focuses fast, it's light, easy to pack and just gets the job done. The big draw however is that it's a 500mm lens that's as easy to hand-hold as a 70-200. Between its weight and size, it allows you to approach in ways that are impossible with larger gear. You're just so much more maneuverable with it. It's easier to change height, get into position, and get the shot.

I did a video review on it as well:

Click to expand...
Steve,
I started watching the above review again. You swayed me once to buy it, but I returned it and ordered the 600 f/4e. I can't find the 600 but still put in an order from B&H. Not sure I will have it by May and don't want to be stuck with only my 300 2.8 and a TC 1.4 again.

There is a great image of an Elk at the 0:51 minute mark. I have questions for you. I shoot with a D850. Your image was with a D5. How involved was your post processing of that image? Did you only use LR? Did you do anything with PS? Did you use Topaz products on it? It is a beautiful shot. How much of a difference in IQ do you think there would be between the two bodies; skill levels aside ;)?

I'm rethinking the 600. I'm scheduled to go to the Tetons in late May and am thinking about ordering the 500PF again and getting a second D850. A second D850 with 500PF would solve two issues beside no learning curve of a 2nd D850 body. I won't have to change lenses frequently and I'll have additional reach with the 500PF. Plus I'll have money left over.

I leave 5/21/2021 and am concerned that I'll be left in a lark without additional reach due to Nikon's delivery issues.
Thanks,
Bob
 
Member's gallery
R.Philip said:
Steve,
I started watching the above review again. You swayed me once to buy it, but I returned it and ordered the 600 f/4e. I can't find the 600 but still put in an order from B&H. Not sure I will have it by May and don't want to be stuck with only my 300 2.8 and a TC 1.4 again.

There is a great image of an Elk at the 0:51 minute mark. I have questions for you. I shoot with a D850. Your image was with a D5. How involved was your post processing of that image? Did you only use LR? Did you do anything with PS? Did you use Topaz products on it? It is a beautiful shot. How much of a difference in IQ do you think there would be between the two bodies; skill levels aside ;)?

I'm rethinking the 600. I'm scheduled to go to the Tetons in late May and am thinking about ordering the 500PF again and getting a second D850. A second D850 with 500PF would solve two issues beside no learning curve of a 2nd D850 body. I won't have to change lenses frequently and I'll have additional reach with the 500PF. Plus I'll have money left over.

I leave 5/21/2021 and am concerned that I'll be left in a lark without additional reach due to Nikon's delivery issues.
Thanks,
Bob
Click to expand...

Thanks!

Processing on that image was minimal, it really didn't need anything. I'm sure I used some noise reduction, although I think in that case it was the method I outline in my Noise Reduction Video Workshop and not Topaz (I use both - I try Topaz first and if I'm not happy, I use my other method). Regardless, any camera could have captured that image, I just happened to have the D5 in my hand at the time. Honestly, I'm not sure that had I used the 600mm (from a few steps farther back) if the image would have appeared that much different. BTW - Between the D5 and D850, I actually like the D850 files every so slightly better most of the time.

That said, while I do enjoy the 500PF and use it quite a bit, I still favor my F/4 glass. It does provide a bit better subject isolation, another stop of light, and it plays better with TCs. I love having both options, but gun to my head, if I had to pick just one, I'd get the F/4 lens. However, what's right for me isn't right for everyone and it depends on your priorities. If hand-holding and and maneuverability are critical, the 500PF makes a ton of sense. That, and some just don't enjoy dealing with the big glass and more than a few have sold their big guns after getting the 500PF. Do what makes it enjoyable, whatever form it takes. :)
 
Member's gallery
What Steve said :)

I too still use my f4 lenses (500 & 600). I can't fault the sharpness of the 500PF, but there's something tough to define about the images from the f4 lenses - crisper? more something? The 500PF has that same edge over the 300PF too, which is a fine sharp lens, but the difference isn't hard to see. Sometimes, when walking more than a few hundred yards and just looking for images, I'll carry just the 300PF and 500PF. Using the big lenses is more planned and intentional :)
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
That said, while I do enjoy the 500PF and use it quite a bit, I still favor my F/4 glass. It does provide a bit better subject isolation, another stop of light, and it plays better with TCs. I love having both options, but gun to my head, if I had to pick just one, I'd get the F/4 lens. However, what's right for me isn't right for everyone and it depends on your priorities. If hand-holding and and maneuverability are critical, the 500PF makes a ton of sense. That, and some just don't enjoy dealing with the big glass and more than a few have sold their big guns after getting the 500PF. Do what makes it enjoyable, whatever form it takes. :)
Click to expand...

eaj101 said:
What Steve said :)
I too still use my f4 lenses (500 & 600). I can't fault the sharpness of the 500PF, but there's something tough to define about the images from the f4 lenses - crisper? more something? The 500PF has that same edge over the 300PF too, which is a fine sharp lens, but the difference isn't hard to see. Sometimes, when walking more than a few hundred yards and just looking for images, I'll carry just the 300PF and 500PF. Using the big lenses is more planned and intentional :)
Click to expand...

Hahaha!!! Okay, I'm keeping my fingers crossed 🤞🤞🤞for the 600. Worst case if I don't get it, I'll be eaten by a bear because I had to get closer with my 300 2.8 & 1.4 TC combo. Hopefully, someone remembers to check my camera for the wall hanger images I get of the charging bear. Can you take pictures and work bear spray at the same time? :ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:
 
Member's gallery
I’m late to the game but I’ll add my vote for the 500pf without reservation.
it is true that it doesn’t offer quite the same level of separation as the f:4 but the flip side is that I never hesitate to grab it so I get way more shots.
my one and only complaint about the 500pf is the lack of built-in filter holder. It would be nice to be able to drop a polarizer in now and then... but it’s truly minor.
 
Member's gallery
500 PF grab shot says it all I think. Sitting in my lounge looking out of the window at snow and -32 degrees feeling bored. Saw a flutter of wings on the sunny side of a spruce tree, grabbed the D500 and 500PF and VOILA!


Pygmy 1.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Love the details! Mine should arrive Monday... looking forward to shooting with it.

Did you have to make any micro adjustments on the camera or was it hitting right out of the box?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top