Nikon 500 f/5.6 pf or 500 f/4 G VR/

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).

S

Slcarn

New member
Supporting Member
Member's gallery
I have been wanting a Nikon 500mm pf since I bought my 300mm pf. I think I am getting close to convincing the Boss it is an essential lens (to go with all my other essential lenses). There is a used 500mm f/4 G VR for sale at about the same price as the 500mm pf. I have searched on line for a comparison and have not been convinced which way to go.

Does anyone have enough experience with both lenses to convince me which way to go. Weight is not a real problem because I do most of my shooting near roads and I have tripod(s), monopods, and good gimbals to handle the weight. I shoot wildlife with D500 and D850 cameras and I want a prime lens instead of the 150-600 Tamron G2 I currently use.

Your help is appreciated.

Steve
 
Member's gallery
I've used both extensively. Get the 500 F/4G if weight isn't a consideration.

The 500PF is a wonderful lens, but the truth is there IS a difference between F/5.6 and F/4 glass. Not only are you gaining a stop (critical in low light), but you are also gaining more subject isolation as well. Plus, and this is another big one, it does way better with TCs for AF. When you put at 1.4TC on the 500PF, you end up at F/8 - most AF points in the camera (and this includes the new D6), can't reliably focus at F/8. But none have a problem at F/5.6. As someone who frequently has a 1.4TC on my 600 F/4 (and I used to on my 500G), this is a HUGE benefit.
 
Member's gallery
Slcarn said:
Weight is not a real problem because I do most of my shooting near roads and I have tripod(s), monopods, and good gimbals to handle the weight. I shoot wildlife with D500 and D850 cameras and I want a prime lens instead of the 150-600 Tamron G2 I currently use.
Click to expand...
I'd second Steve's advice above. If weight isn't an issue and you don't plan to hand hold a lot then I'd strongly recommend the f/4 lens. They're both great lenses but the real beauty of the PF lens is portability, hand holding ease and low weight. But there's nothing like working with fast glass. In addition to everything mentioned above, viewfinder images are really bright which is a really nice plus as light levels fall.

I'd say since you already have a very nice zoom for hand holding in the Tamron you won't gain a ton with the 500mm PF lens unless you want to walk with it quite a bit. The 500mm f/4 will open up new possibilities especially in terms of subject isolation, background blur and the ability to work with teleconverters while still retaining solid AF performance.
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
I've used both extensively. Get the 500 F/4G if weight isn't a consideration.

The 500PF is a wonderful lens, but the truth is there IS a difference between F/5.6 and F/4 glass. Not only are you gaining a stop (critical in low light), but you are also gaining more subject isolation as well. Plus, and this is another big one, it does way better with TCs for AF. When you put at 1.4TC on the 500PF, you end up at F/8 - most AF points in the camera (and this includes the new D6), can't reliably focus at F/8. But none have a problem at F/5.6. As someone who frequently has a 1.4TC on my 600 F/4 (and I used to on my 500G), this is a HUGE benefit.
Click to expand...
Steve,
Thank you for your reply. I appreciated input from those who have used the equipment. And, especially from you since I have watched your videos and ebooks so many times I feel like we're friends. Advise from trusted friends is very valuable.
Steve
 
Member's gallery
DRwyoming said:
I'd second Steve's advice above. If weight isn't an issue and you don't plan to hand hold a lot then I'd strongly recommend the f/4 lens. They're both great lenses but the real beauty of the PF lens is portability, hand holding ease and low weight. But there's nothing like working with fast glass. In addition to everything mentioned above, viewfinder images are really bright which is a really nice plus as light levels fall.

I'd say since you already have a very nice zoom for hand holding in the Tamron you won't gain a ton with the 500mm PF lens unless you want to walk with it quite a bit. The 500mm f/4 will open up new possibilities especially in terms of subject isolation, background blur and the ability to work with teleconverters while still retaining solid AF performance.
Click to expand...
DRwyoming,
Thanks for taking the time to reply, I appreciate your sage advise.
Steve
 
Member's gallery
I know the OP is using a D500 and D850 so this is a bit off topic. But Steve mentioned TCs. And in that respect, it is interesting that if you use the 500 mm PF with a 1.4x TC III on a Z7 body, all the focus points work across the frame, even at f8 - and being a Z body, the focus points cover almost the entire frame. I have used the 500 mm PF with 1.4x TC III on a D500, D850 and Z7. Given the available focus points, I find I prefer to use it on a Z7 if I want to use my 1.4x TC. Without the TC, I prefer to use it on a D500 or D850 if I am expecting birds in flight or other fast action. I would of course love to have the 500 mm f4 lens, but in many cases -- like shooting from my kayak or canoe -- I prefer the smaller size.
 
Member's gallery
BillW said:
I know the OP is using a D500 and D850 so this is a bit off topic. But Steve mentioned TCs. And in that respect, it is interesting that if you use the 500 mm PF with a 1.4x TC III on a Z7 body, all the focus points work across the frame, even at f8 - and being a Z body, the focus points cover almost the entire frame. I have used the 500 mm PF with 1.4x TC III on a D500, D850 and Z7. Given the available focus points, I find I prefer to use it on a Z7 if I want to use my 1.4x TC. Without the TC, I prefer to use it on a D500 or D850 if I am expecting birds in flight or other fast action. I would of course love to have the 500 mm f4 lens, but in many cases -- like shooting from my kayak or canoe -- I prefer the smaller size.
Click to expand...
Yes, good point. Mirrorless isn't subject to the same AF limitations as our DSLRs since the light path isn't blocked by the physical opening of the lens (thankfully!).
 
Member's gallery
I also agree with Steve's advice. I have both 500mm lenses. The f 4 version is a huge benefit in early morning and late afternoon shooting situations where light is is at a premium. And backgrounds look better at f 4 than f5.6.

If you will be using it handheld and during good light situations, then maybe the f5.6 version is the one to get. If you can handle the extra $$ and weight, get the f4 version.
 
Member's gallery
I had heard the 500mm f4G model isn't very sharp wide open and needs to be stopped down. Is this true?

I also have read some reviews of the Sigma 500 f4 compared to the Nikon G model and the Sigma performed equally optically however once customized actually focused faster and comes in at a lower cost. Might be worth a little research if one is looking to save a little.
 
Member's gallery
dtibbals said:
I had heard the 500mm f4G model isn't very sharp wide open and needs to be stopped down. Is this true?
Click to expand...
I owned that lens and I almost always shot it wide open with great results. Perhaps some have had other experiences but at least for the copy I owned it was razor sharp wide open.
 
Member's gallery
dtibbals said:
I had heard the 500mm f4G model isn't very sharp wide open and needs to be stopped down. Is this true?

I also have read some reviews of the Sigma 500 f4 compared to the Nikon G model and the Sigma performed equally optically however once customized actually focused faster and comes in at a lower cost. Might be worth a little research if one is looking to save a little.
Click to expand...
Can't speak to the Sigma, but my 500G was crazy sharp.
 
Member's gallery
A slightly different point of view. I owned the 500 f/4 E FL and then after getting my 500PF I sold off the f/4 prime. IQ was close enough that it didn't matter to my final images. The benefit of the 500/4 was to use it at 700/5.6 and that was about it for me. I found myself always grabbing the 500PF for the lightweight, great IQ and agility for tracking BIF. If you are after a 700mm lens than I'd get the 500/4 G. If you are after a high quality 500mm lens that will allow you to grab shots faster because of the reduced weight and better mobility/agility then I'd recommend the 500PF.
 
Member's gallery
arbitrage said:
A slightly different point of view. I owned the 500 f/4 E FL and then after getting my 500PF I sold off the f/4 prime. IQ was close enough that it didn't matter to my final images. The benefit of the 500/4 was to use it at 700/5.6 and that was about it for me. I found myself always grabbing the 500PF for the lightweight, great IQ and agility for tracking BIF. If you are after a 700mm lens than I'd get the 500/4 G. If you are after a high quality 500mm lens that will allow you to grab shots faster because of the reduced weight and better mobility/agility then I'd recommend the 500PF.
Click to expand...
Your advice is spot on. It's the light weight of the lens that allows you to grab BIF shots faster handheld. I don't own the 500mm f4 but even between the 200-500 and the 500mm PF there is significant weight difference. Since I purchased the 500mm PF I rarely use the 200-500 now a days.
 
Member's gallery
Think I'll also weigh in with a slightly different perspective. My experience is that DSLR's like fairly fast glass to C-AF well -- at least f5.6 or faster. The benefit of starting with an f4 lens is that you can tack on a 1.4x TC without issue. But my experience shooting a Z7 -- even with its C-AF limitations -- is that mirrorless seems to be more tolerant of slower glass. As a consequence, I'm using slower glass and am making much heavier use of TC's with my Z7 than I was ever able to with a DSLR. That doesn't help to blow out backgrounds, but as lenses get longer that's not so tough to do anyway. A little gaussian blur in post also helps. ;-) Hence, if you plan to shoot mirrorless, and depending on the circumstances, a large, fast prime lens may not be quite as important.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Thank you all for your help. I bought the AF-s Nikkor 500mm G ED VR yesterday, what a lens! Played around with it in the front yard photographing hummingbirds. I have a lot more to learn about getting the best photos but I can't believe how many keepers there were. Shot at around 35 feet still required cropping of these small birds but such isolation.
Thanks again,
Steve
 
Member's gallery
Steve said:
Yes, good point. Mirrorless isn't subject to the same AF limitations as our DSLRs since the light path isn't blocked by the physical opening of the lens (thankfully!).
Click to expand...
Let me use this conversation to interject just how much I'm loving this forum you've created, Steve (P). Oh and there are obviously way too many Stevens with cameras LOL
 
Member's gallery
20200825-850_1945.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Sorry, I just realized that I was a little late for the decision support ;), but nevertheless ...

Slcarn said:
Does anyone have enough experience with both lenses to convince me which way to go. Weight is not a real problem because I do most of my shooting near roads and I have tripod(s), monopods, and good gimbals to handle the weight. I shoot wildlife with D500 and D850 cameras and I want a prime lens instead of the 150-600 Tamron G2 I currently use.
Click to expand...

Well. I am just a hobbyist and lightyears away from the level of experience that @Steve has and probably a lot of others on this forum, but I have both lenses and sometimes I even use both at the same time. From reading I understand you are payed for making pictures ("Boss"). So from what you write I would fully agree with @Steve. Get the 500 f4 G, because it gives you the extra stop and as we all know even the good old G is an incredibly sharp lens with a fast AF, even still if you shoot with the TC14.

Despite all that I love the small one very much and I bought it straight away after reading @Steve 's review. In the beginning I really thought about selling the 500G but in the end I just couldn't do it ... Not talking about IQ and AF speed one of the main thing with the 500PF mobility and agility. Shooting the 500PF handheld is a breeze and I don't have the time to really go out for taking pictures very often. So, sometimes I do funny things like sitting in my girl friend's garden (well, it is more like a mediterranian jungle) as a green bubble and try to get what I possibly can - including hedgehogs, mice etc. In this scenario I often have the 500G on the gimbal - perhaps with TC if I am looking for the woodpackers in the big maple tree - and a second body on my laps for the things around me that I couldn't get otherwise, because I can't reach the spot with the camera on the tripod at all or at least fast enough without moving to much. This second body then has the 500PF or the 300PF on depending on what's on the tripod.

The other argument is travelling. I know f5.6 on a DX body is a compromise regarding object isolation, but if you get a camera set together with two bodies (FX + DX as "TC") ranging from 24mm/2.8 to 750mm/5.6 that passes as hand luggage, that's really nice . This set I also can take on my mountainbike so I can reach remote places in the forest from home without using the car. If I tried that with the big backpack with the 500G and the other gear including a big Gitzo with gimbal, it would probably flip me over any time I have to go up hill :D.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I have seen some nice ones at ebay for about 4-5 k€ here in Germany, which is not too far from the 500 PF prive level, but I am not sure about international shipping - especially from private persons.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks as much as I want to upgrade I will probably wait. I have only been doing photography for a couple of years now and putting down that kind of money for a lens although I think it's totally worth it I'm going to wait a bit. There isn't that much difference between the 500mm f4 and the 600 f4 when you get to that level :) I'm really happy with my 500mm PF and for the price point I think it's pretty amazing. I'm working on getting to know the lens and my camera in low light conditions and tweek out every bit of what I can get out of it.
RGR_9049Web.jpg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
Curious why not the 600F4? Looks like they are pretty close in price to the 500f4 and I seems like I am always looking for more reach? Just wondering why choose the 500F4 over the 600f4.
 
Member's gallery
AndyL3 said:
Curious why not the 600F4? Looks like they are pretty close in price to the 500f4 and I seems like I am always looking for more reach? Just wondering why choose the 500F4 over the 600f4.
Click to expand...
I can't speak for the OP, but faced with that decision I chose the 600mm f/4. It's not much bigger but is quite a bit heavier so any hand holding is for very short periods but the narrower angle of view is really helpful especially for smaller subjects. I eventually picked up a 500mm f/5.6 that I mostly use handheld and take on longer hikes in good wildlife habitat and also keep mounted to a body in the passenger seat when driving around looking for roadside wildlife. Now having a light and portable 500mm along with the bigger 600mm makes even more sense. If I won the lottery (tough since I don't play) I'd probably swap my 600mm f/4 for either the newer, lighter version or the monster 800mm f/5.6 but I don't see that happening any time soon.

I would say that new prices on the 500mm f/5.6 and used prices on the 500mm f/4 are surprisingly close and in some cases you can find the faster glass in good condition for less than the retail price on the PF lens. So from a financial standpoint those two lenses are pretty close to one another but going to the 600mm f/4 will set you back another couple of grand at least on the used market unless you find a screaming deal so that can be a factor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top