Experience with Nikon 500 mm PF lens in Costa Rica?

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).

I am debating between the following long lens combinations for the upcoming Costa Rica workshop (simply because I own all of these):

1. Nikon 400 mm FL
Nikon 300 mm PF
TC x1.4, 1.7, 2.0
2. Nikon 500 mm PF
Nikon 300 mm PF
TC x1.4
3. Nikon 400 mm FL
Nikon 500 mm PF
Nikon 300 mm PF
TC x1.4, 1.7, 2.0

Any comments or suggestions regarding these choices, specifically for the Costa Rica workshop, would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

Shlomo Neuman
 
Any comments or suggestions regarding these choices, specifically for the Costa Rica workshop, would be greatly appreciated.
Two things I'd put emphasis on for a Costa Rica or similar trip is light gathering and close focus. From that standpoint I'd probably opt for 1 or 3. I'd also want a macro lens but the 300mm PF (potentially with a TC) does a pretty good job for pseudo macro on the amphibian and reptile scale. Honestly if it fits your luggage limits I'd go with option 3.
 
Two things I'd put emphasis on for a Costa Rica or similar trip is light gathering and close focus. From that standpoint I'd probably opt for 1 or 3. I'd also want a macro lens but the 300mm PF (potentially with a TC) does a pretty good job for pseudo macro on the amphibian and reptile scale. Honestly if it fits your luggage limits I'd go with option 3.
Thank you for your advice DR; I agree but am still hoping to see what experience have people had with the Nikon 500 mm PF in the shady groves of Costa Rica. Steve, what do y you think?
 
We have a lot of people with 500FP lenses and they work well. They are light, easy to carry, and a reasonable focal length. Still, if I had a choice, I think I'd prioritize that 400 2.8 along with come TCs. The 300PF is handy sometimes, but on my workshops most of the time we need longer (still, it's sometimes nice to have).

The downside with the 500PF is, of course, the aperture, but it's nit impossible to use. Still, I think with the 400 2.8 it'll be a secondary lens.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top