Nikon 500 PF Problems ?

[S.Pfaff1994]

Hey everyone I upgraded from a Nikon 200 – 500 mm to the Nikon 500mm PF, because I never was impressed with the results of the 200–500 and because of personal reasons I dont have to much time to waste I upgraded to get the most of my picture as long as I still can photograph. So now I use the 500 PF on my Z6 but maybe I want to much or I got an bad copy of the lens. Would maybe some nice person look at the raws I uploaded in my dropbox and could tell me if they are sharp or not. I tried everthing tripod no tripod all vr modes and this is my normal sharpness I get. I hope someone will help me and look at them. I already say thank you for our help

Here is the link to the files:

Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com

 

[soundbyte]

The base of the horns on the head of the Black Buck in NZ6_3009.dng look realistic to me (I had goats, milking and cashmere for over 20 years).
You seem to have a shallow depth of field with the goat images, what was the aperture?
Personally I think they look OK, I would be happy with that result, others may/will differ.

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

The base of the horns on the head of the Black Buck in NZ6_3009.dng look realistic to me (I had goats, milking and cashmere for over 20 years).
You seem to have a shallow depth of field with the goat images, what was the aperture?
Personally I think they look OK, I would be happy with that result, others may/will differ.

First of all thanks for the reply and your honest opinion. What you mean with realistic ? My main language is german and my english isnt the best in the world.
All the prictures are taken wide open with F5.6

 

[Ralph]

Hey everyone I upgraded from a Nikon 200 – 500 mm to the Nikon 500mm PF, because I never was impressed with the results of the 200–500 and because of personal reasons I dont have to much time to waste I upgraded to get the most of my picture as long as I still can photograph. So now I use the 500 PF on my Z6 but maybe I want to much or I got an bad copy of the lens. Would maybe some nice person look at the raws I uploaded in my dropbox and could tell me if they are sharp or not. I tried everthing tripod no tripod all vr modes and this is my normal sharpness I get. I hope someone will help me and look at them. I already say thank you for our help

Here is the link to the files:

Dropbox - File Deleted - Simplify your life

www.dropbox.com

What are your settings? What focusing mode are you using? Are you shooting auto or manual? are you using single shot or continuous? Give me as much info as you can. The day you shot appears hazy. Was it hazy or foggy?

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

What are your settings? What focusing mode are you using? Are you shooting auto or manual? are you using single shot or continuous? Give me as much info as you can. The day you shot appears hazy. Was it hazy or foggy?

Thanks for your reply. They were all shot on different days. The day where I shot the goat where a mix of sun and clouds. I used both AF-S and AF-C in manual mode with auto ISO. But maybe you can download the raws to see them 1:1 in lightroom ?. Thats why I uploaded them to my ddropbox for download but so its easier to judge if they are sharp or not.

 

[Ralph]

Thanks for your reply. They were all shot on different days. The day where I shot the goat where a mix of sun and clouds. I used both AF-S and AF-C in manual mode with auto ISO. But maybe you can download the raws to see them 1:1 in lightroom ?. Thats why I uploaded them to my ddropbox for download but so its easier to judge if they are sharp or not.

I looked at them all after downloading. The only one that appears a little soft is the young one standing in a field. The could be something atmospheric going. The rest look fine to me. The one shot where the two animals are together, it appears as though you focused on the one in the background. Is that what you did? What focusing mode were you using?

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

I looked at them all after downloading. The only one that appears a little soft is the young one standing in a field. The could be something atmospheric going. The rest look fine to me. The one shot where the two animals are together, it appears as though you focused on the one in the background. Is that what you did? What focusing mode were you using?

First of all big thanks for downloading and looking at them. Happy to hear that they look good to you and just the wild goat in the field looks soft. Maybe because on that photo I shot across a small field the sun was hitting. At the picture with the 2 goats I first made a picture focused at the one in the back and then a picture focused on the one at the front and combined them later in PS. Focus mode is mixed on the pictures sometime AFS and sometimes AFC because I cant decide which one to use because in AFC the Z6 sometimes hunts alot even on stationary animals and in AFS the focus just is spot on but I have to switch to AFC when the animal decides to move. And al other pictures fron the goose and the deer look good to you ?

 

[Ralph]

I looked at them all after downloading. The only one that appears a little soft is the young one standing in a field. The could be something atmospheric going. The rest look fine to me. The one shot where the two animals are together, it appears as though you focused on the one in the background. Is that what you did? What focusing mode were you using?

If your using the single focusing point mode and not doing back button focusing your point of focus will change when you recompose.

 

[Ralph]

They look fine. How long have you had the lens? If this is the first time your are using it, give it some time. I’ve had mine for less than a year and there are times where I think I nailed it to only be disappointed because of my technique.

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

They look fine. How long have you had the lens? If this is the first time your are using it, give it some time. I’ve had mine for less than a year and there are times where I think I nailed it to only be disappointed because of my technique.

I using back button focus but on the Z6 the good thing is I dont have to recompose because the af points go from edge to edge. I have the lens since last october and first I thought maybe it just need some time to get used to it but if you are saying they looking good and sharp to you maybe I just had unrealistic expectations and this is as sharp as it gets when it comes to photography, because many people say the 500 pf is as sharp as the 500 F4 E.

 

[Ralph]

I using back button focus but on the Z6 the good thing is I dont have to recompose because the af points go from edge to edge. I have the lens since last october and first I thought maybe it just need some time to get used to it but if you are saying they looking good and sharp to you maybe I just had unrealistic expectations and this is as sharp as it gets when it comes to photography, because many people say the 500 pf is as sharp as the 500 F4 E.

I shoot mostly birds and when I put that single point focusing box on its eye I will almost always get a razor sharp image. But there are times where I don’t. There could be movement or the camera didn’t get a good lock. Any number of reasons. If you have doubts, read Steve’s book about how to test the lens. That should eliminate any doubts you may have. But truthfully from what I see it looks like it is fine.

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

I shoot mostly birds and when I put that single point focusing box on its eye I will almost always get a razor sharp image. But there are times where I don’t. There could be movement or the camera didn’t get a good lock. Any number of reasons. If you have doubts, read Steve’s book about how to test the lens. That should eliminate any doubts you may have. But truthfully from what I see it looks like it is fine.

Great Thank you again for you help and time

 

[Ralph]

Great Thank you again for you help and time

Your Welcome. I hope I helped you.

 

[soundbyte]

What you mean with realistic ?

They look like they are in reality, hard, rough to the touch, with jagged edges, ridged and knocked about from the bucks head butting each other, realistic.
Have spent quite some time handling does and bucks with horns like these, the horns are the primary method to control these animals.
If you do not control the horns you can get badly hurt if one of these animals gets riled up and strikes out with their horns.

From what you said with focusing on the black animal, then I feel that the lens is pretty good from my perspective.

 

[Andy Work]

I downloaded all of them too. The first three are pretty good. If you are hand holding the camera you may want to try a little faster shutter speed.
#3453 There may be haze or heat shimmer affecting this one. Again, 1/500 may not be fast enough if hand holding.
#3662 & #3672 The 1/250 shutter speed may be causing these to not be as sharp as they could.

 

[Warren D]

The 500pf is sharper than the 200-500 but is not sharper than nor as sharp as the 500E. It gets close but it does not equal the 500E. A lot of it boils down to technique. I've had my 500pf since last fall and there are times I'm amazed by the image quality but other times I wonder. I've asked myself the same questions about my 500E and 600E. Static tests on a tripod with frame filling subjects always turn out well but I struggle to get the same results in the field. My conclusion? My technique coupled with atmospheric effects. The latter can't fixed as easily as technique. Coming from a 200-500, the higher resolution lenses like the 500pf, 500E, 600E do require a little more care in their handling as they will show any flaws in technique more readily. Another point I found last weekend, I'm really used to the weight of the larger lenses and when I switched to the 500pf I found it harder to hold steady. I guess I have been using the weight as a form of dampening.

 

[sh1209]

I recently upgraded to the 500pf as well and had trouble for a few days getting sharp images. In my case I had the lens focus mode in the center position and was ever so slightly moving the focus ring causing blurry images. After moving into the forward position I haven’t had any issues. Also you can enable focus peaking to make sure this isn’t happening. In the center position, even the slightest movement of the focus ring overrides auto focus. Also I’ve found 1/500th and above in sport mode work the best for sharp images. Hope that helps.

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

The 500pf is sharper than the 200-500 but is not sharper than nor as sharp as the 500E. It gets close but it does not equal the 500E. A lot of it boils down to technique. I've had my 500pf since last fall and there are times I'm amazed by the image quality but other times I wonder. I've asked myself the same questions about my 500E and 600E. Static tests on a tripod with frame filling subjects always turn out well but I struggle to get the same results in the field. My conclusion? My technique coupled with atmospheric effects. The latter can't fixed as easily as technique. Coming from a 200-500, the higher resolution lenses like the 500pf, 500E, 600E do require a little more care in their handling as they will show any flaws in technique more readily. Another point I found last weekend, I'm really used to the weight of the larger lenses and when I switched to the 500pf I found it harder to hold steady. I guess I have been using the weight as a form of dampening.

Thanks for your reply. Maybe its just that. Maybe my technique isn't on point. Because they were all hand held because of my bone disease I cant carry my heavy Gitzo tripod anymore. Maybe this sharper lens just shows my hand holding flaws more then the 200 500 and I just have to train a bit more.

 

[soundbyte]

Maybe a carbon fibre monopod may help?
I have a Neweer TC333C that weighs .34 kilos.

 

[ChrisM]

The 500pf is sharper than the 200-500 but is not sharper than nor as sharp as the 500E. It gets close but it does not equal the 500E. A lot of it boils down to technique. I've had my 500pf since last fall and there are times I'm amazed by the image quality but other times I wonder. I've asked myself the same questions about my 500E and 600E. Static tests on a tripod with frame filling subjects always turn out well but I struggle to get the same results in the field. My conclusion? My technique coupled with atmospheric effects. The latter can't fixed as easily as technique. Coming from a 200-500, the higher resolution lenses like the 500pf, 500E, 600E do require a little more care in their handling as they will show any flaws in technique more readily. Another point I found last weekend, I'm really used to the weight of the larger lenses and when I switched to the 500pf I found it harder to hold steady. I guess I have been using the weight as a form of dampening.

The 500PF is a great lens in "good" light, but my experience is that it tends to lose a lot of subject definition and clarity when the light is less favorable, like e.g. strong sideways daylight. In these scenarios I am reminded of the fact that it is after all in essence a compromise lens, trading ultimate performance and IQ for weight and size. Likely, the PF element as well as the smaller elements and smaller wide open aperture play a role here.

There is nothing wrong with that, because in light that favors 500PF, it is remarkable how such a small and light lens can turn in such a performance. But I would be disappointed if the 500E were not a good notch above the 500PF, in the sense of better performance across a larger range of type of light/distance scenarios, and also better color (which can lack some depth with the 500PF) and smoother rendering (the 500PF can be a bit harsh in the sharpness department). And most of all: better performance with TC's.

I have not tried the 500E myself, but do have plans to buy it (or a coming Z super telelens) and expect a bit extra from it. I have used the Sigma 500mm/f4.5 and the Pentax DA560mm f5.6.

 

[Steve]

Took a quick look.

#3009,3453 show just an ever-so-slight amount of motion blur.
#3019, 3036 looks like there's a small amount of heat haze. Maybe...
3062,3072 are tough. They aren't as sharp as I'd expect but I can't tell if it's mis-focus or a slight amount of motion blur.

Overall, yes, you should be getting sharper results than this. My copy of the 500PF is very nearly as sharp as my 600mm F/4. However, in looking at the images I'm not sure I'd blame helens street-away. I think heat haze was playing a part with the goats and motion blur may have been a problem with the rest. I'd test it some more at higher shutter speeds (or off a tripod) and see.

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

Took a quick look.

#3009,3453 show just an ever-so-slight amount of motion blur.
#3019, 3036 looks like there's a small amount of heat haze. Maybe...
3062,3072 are tough. They aren't as sharp as I'd expect but I can't tell if it's mis-focus or a slight amount of motion blur.

Overall, yes, you should be getting sharper results than this. My copy of the 500PF is very nearly as sharp as my 600mm F/4. However, in looking at the images I'm not sure I'd blame helens street-away. I think heat haze was playing a part with the goats and motion blur may have been a problem with the rest. I'd test it some more at higher shutter speeds (or off a tripod) and see.

Hey thank for your reply I added a picture of a canadian goose I took as a test today. A friend of mine carried the tripod for me and if I look at the pattern on the feet it looks sharper to me so maybe it was just blur because of my shaky hands.

 

[Andrew Lamberson]

I often (50% +) use a monopod even with my 300 PF. My 200-500 ALWAYS on a heavy tripod or the Monopod.

It takes a little practice to get good with the monopod, when I first started using it was worse than handheld! But now I have the hang of it and it makes a significant difference!

I use a Wimberly MH-100 monogimbal on mine and love it! I'm 6'4" and I had to find a really tall monopod and the gimbal allows me to shoot way above my head.

If you use a simple ball mount on the monopod you can collapse the monopod into a "handle" to hold your camera. You can either use your hand to help hold it tight to your body as a brace, or if you are sitting, put it between your legs, both hands on the camera (like a hand hold) and now you have a 3 point hold which is much more stable. You can adjust the ball mount to make sure the back of the camera is flat to your face.

Any motion on your part will blur the detail.

I am also wondering, what do you have your white balance set to?

Do you smoke? If so, clean the lens!

 

[S.Pfaff1994]

I often (50% +) use a monopod even with my 300 PF. My 200-500 ALWAYS on a heavy tripod or the Monopod.

It takes a little practice to get good with the monopod, when I first started using it was worse than handheld! But now I have the hang of it and it makes a significant difference!

I use a Wimberly MH-100 monogimbal on mine and love it! I'm 6'4" and I had to find a really tall monopod and the gimbal allows me to shoot way above my head.

If you use a simple ball mount on the monopod you can collapse the monopod into a "handle" to hold your camera. You can either use your hand to help hold it tight to your body as a brace, or if you are sitting, put it between your legs, both hands on the camera (like a hand hold) and now you have a 3 point hold which is much more stable. You can adjust the ball mount to make sure the back of the camera is flat to your face.

Any motion on your part will blur the detail.

I am also wondering, what do you have your white balance set to?

Do you smoke? If so, clean the lens!

Maybe I should try a monopod. White Balance is set to automatic A1 I think it is on the Z6. I smoke e-cigarette but just outside so not inside or in the car where it could get on my lens.

 

[MikeA]

I often (50% +) use a monopod even with my 300 PF. My 200-500 ALWAYS on a heavy tripod or the Monopod.

It takes a little practice to get good with the monopod, when I first started using it was worse than handheld! But now I have the hang of it and it makes a significant difference!

I use a Wimberly MH-100 monogimbal on mine and love it! I'm 6'4" and I had to find a really tall monopod and the gimbal allows me to shoot way above my head.

If you use a simple ball mount on the monopod you can collapse the monopod into a "handle" to hold your camera. You can either use your hand to help hold it tight to your body as a brace, or if you are sitting, put it between your legs, both hands on the camera (like a hand hold) and now you have a 3 point hold which is much more stable. You can adjust the ball mount to make sure the back of the camera is flat to your face.

Any motion on your part will blur the detail.

I am also wondering, what do you have your white balance set to?

Do you smoke? If so, clean the lens!

Hi Andrew, just curious, I almost always go handheld with 1/1250s, f5.6 and auto iso with my 300 PF and 1.4 TC. What Settings do you use with the monopod?