Dmacfarl
Active member
So am I. But the TC14e was fine in this shot. I was thinking about getting the TC14eiii - but not now !
Nikon 500 pf vs Nikon 500 f4 G ED VR lens (not the latest FL version)
- Thread starter sid_19911991
- 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).
Iām in the same boat as you, but sitting at the opposite end. I currently own a 500 f/4G, thinking of getting rid of it and getting a 500PF. Thereās a thread about it floating around in the general discussion.
sid_19911991
Well-known member
I think I will stick with 500pf for now.
Reasons
1) The 500 f4 G is 3.9kgs. Not suitable for my style of shooting. Mostly handheld.
2) Not suitable to take wildlife videos. With 500 pf I can manual focus for video, even handlheld!
3) I will borrow the expensive primes for the odd trip instead of buying them.
4) A lot of pros stick to shooting bifs in good light despite the best gear. 500 pf f5.6 performs well in good light.
5) IBIS on future mirrorless Z camera which I may buy will solve the VR issue that I have with 500 pf.
This topic comes up regularly and I have posted multiple responses to them.
I come from the perspective of a serious nature photographers. When I am not at work, I generally eat, breathe, and sleep nature photography. I was a former ecological researcher with multiple degrees in the field, and am now a high school educational coach for teachers. My dreams of being a full time professional photographer was squashed in the mid 2000's when the value of all of my stock photos plummeted due to the free images being made available by the emergence of digital photography. While I do not make any real money in photography today, I do lead workshops, publish the occasional photo essay, and maintain a website.
I share the latter because I want the reader to understand that if I thought there was a serious advantage to buying a piece of gear, I would find a way to own it. My income, while modest, could afford the purchase of a used 500 FLE, but I prefer to put that type of money into adventure travel.
In October 2018 my 500PF arrived. I was an early adopter and bought it after evaluating the three accessible choices in front of me... the Sigma Sport 500mm f/4, Nikon 500mm f/4G, and 500mm f/5.6PF. I had been using the 200-400VR and 200-500VR at the time, but was looking forward to shooting a 500mm prime. Prior to Nikon's PF announcement, I was poised to buy a new Sigma 500, but held off. I've used the 500G many times, and I shot Brad Hill's 500 Sigma Sport during a weeklong workshop in and around Johnstone's Straight. In the end I chose to go with the new 500PF over the 500G because I wanted the 5 year warranty on the lens. This left the choice between the Sigma and the PF. In the end, I chose portability over the faster optic.
To maximize my 500PF, I have relegated its use to either a D500, D850 or Z7. I have chosen these bodies because I can easily use the lens as if it were 750mm. Clearly, the lens is not a 750mm lens, but the D500 and cropped high res camera provide an equivalent 750mm field of view.
The Sigma is a fine lens and mounting it to a 1.4x would give me a similar focal length on an FX body. There is no doubt that this has huge potential, however it is worth noting that the both the Sigma and Nikon 500G w/ 1.4x converters need to be stopped down to f/7 to reach the sharpness that I can get from a 500PF on my D500. Furthermore, there is much to be said about the compact weight and size of the 500PF. Just this morning I hiked two miles, uphill both ways (up then down to get there & up then down to get back ;-p ). A 500mm f/4 would have been added weight that I am glad to have left in the dust.
So... why get a 500PF?
1. It is sharp throughout its range.
2. It can be had new for the price of a used 500G and is less expensive than the 500 Sport
3. It is compact and allows one to carry a full kit on their back.
4. Built for professional use.
So... why get the 500G (or Sigma Sport)?
1. You want the bokeh that a 500mm f/4 can produce... this is not trivial and is the reason why I still wonder if I made the right choice.
2. You need the extra light afforded by the f/4 aperture... I do not think that this is a real issue today. Most cameras can handle ISO 6400. I was shooting ISO 6400 / f5.6 / 1/350 second during an early morning shoot at a dark pond. I love low light shooting and high ISO tech compensates for slower lenses.
3. You shoot a lot of shorebirds where specular highlights are common. If this is your jam, you will not like the bokeh from a PF lens. Much like #1, this is something to consider.
4. You like owning a bigger heavier lens because it makes you feel good, and fulfills your dream of being a "real" wildlife photographer. While few care to admit it, many love their long glass because it supports their dream of being a NatGeo type of photographer. There is nothing wrong with wanting something that makes you feel good, and if how you look with your gear during a bear jam in the Grand Tetons matters to you, then you should get the 500mm f/4G; after all, photography is a hobby for most, and hobbies are about embellishing your pastime. It took me a long time to sell my 200-400VR after buying a 500PF. I loved that lens, it made me feel like a "real" photographer... feeding this part of my ego WAS important to me for a while. These days I am way more obsessed with the images I can produce as well as the compositions and the behaviors I can capture. So while my PF is diminutive in size, it has a powerful image-making punch.
cheers,
bruce
I come from the perspective of a serious nature photographers. When I am not at work, I generally eat, breathe, and sleep nature photography. I was a former ecological researcher with multiple degrees in the field, and am now a high school educational coach for teachers. My dreams of being a full time professional photographer was squashed in the mid 2000's when the value of all of my stock photos plummeted due to the free images being made available by the emergence of digital photography. While I do not make any real money in photography today, I do lead workshops, publish the occasional photo essay, and maintain a website.
I share the latter because I want the reader to understand that if I thought there was a serious advantage to buying a piece of gear, I would find a way to own it. My income, while modest, could afford the purchase of a used 500 FLE, but I prefer to put that type of money into adventure travel.
In October 2018 my 500PF arrived. I was an early adopter and bought it after evaluating the three accessible choices in front of me... the Sigma Sport 500mm f/4, Nikon 500mm f/4G, and 500mm f/5.6PF. I had been using the 200-400VR and 200-500VR at the time, but was looking forward to shooting a 500mm prime. Prior to Nikon's PF announcement, I was poised to buy a new Sigma 500, but held off. I've used the 500G many times, and I shot Brad Hill's 500 Sigma Sport during a weeklong workshop in and around Johnstone's Straight. In the end I chose to go with the new 500PF over the 500G because I wanted the 5 year warranty on the lens. This left the choice between the Sigma and the PF. In the end, I chose portability over the faster optic.
To maximize my 500PF, I have relegated its use to either a D500, D850 or Z7. I have chosen these bodies because I can easily use the lens as if it were 750mm. Clearly, the lens is not a 750mm lens, but the D500 and cropped high res camera provide an equivalent 750mm field of view.
The Sigma is a fine lens and mounting it to a 1.4x would give me a similar focal length on an FX body. There is no doubt that this has huge potential, however it is worth noting that the both the Sigma and Nikon 500G w/ 1.4x converters need to be stopped down to f/7 to reach the sharpness that I can get from a 500PF on my D500. Furthermore, there is much to be said about the compact weight and size of the 500PF. Just this morning I hiked two miles, uphill both ways (up then down to get there & up then down to get back ;-p ). A 500mm f/4 would have been added weight that I am glad to have left in the dust.
So... why get a 500PF?
1. It is sharp throughout its range.
2. It can be had new for the price of a used 500G and is less expensive than the 500 Sport
3. It is compact and allows one to carry a full kit on their back.
4. Built for professional use.
So... why get the 500G (or Sigma Sport)?
1. You want the bokeh that a 500mm f/4 can produce... this is not trivial and is the reason why I still wonder if I made the right choice.
2. You need the extra light afforded by the f/4 aperture... I do not think that this is a real issue today. Most cameras can handle ISO 6400. I was shooting ISO 6400 / f5.6 / 1/350 second during an early morning shoot at a dark pond. I love low light shooting and high ISO tech compensates for slower lenses.
3. You shoot a lot of shorebirds where specular highlights are common. If this is your jam, you will not like the bokeh from a PF lens. Much like #1, this is something to consider.
4. You like owning a bigger heavier lens because it makes you feel good, and fulfills your dream of being a "real" wildlife photographer. While few care to admit it, many love their long glass because it supports their dream of being a NatGeo type of photographer. There is nothing wrong with wanting something that makes you feel good, and if how you look with your gear during a bear jam in the Grand Tetons matters to you, then you should get the 500mm f/4G; after all, photography is a hobby for most, and hobbies are about embellishing your pastime. It took me a long time to sell my 200-400VR after buying a 500PF. I loved that lens, it made me feel like a "real" photographer... feeding this part of my ego WAS important to me for a while. These days I am way more obsessed with the images I can produce as well as the compositions and the behaviors I can capture. So while my PF is diminutive in size, it has a powerful image-making punch.
cheers,
bruce
Cyprio42
Active member
I have the F4 G VR and I've just purchased the 500mm PF. This was purely to do with the weight difference and being able to handhold the PF when doing birds in flight. My 500mm VR is up for sale but I know I'll regret selling it.
eaj101
Well-known member
I regret selling my 500 f4 too, but I'm not selling my 500 PF either... Maybe there are days when the 'look' of images off the f4 appeals to me (the images from it and the PF are different, but I'd be hard-pressed to describe the difference).
I had the both 500 f4G VR and it was a good lens, but other than the f4 advantage, I think the 500 f5.6 PF is a better lens, which I now have.
I think the "not at all sharp at distance greater than 60-80 feet or so when shot at f5.6" is an AF fine tune issue. Do not have any such issue with my Z7 and Z7II.
This was shot at over 800mts (2,500 feet) and is tack sharp:
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
a 100% crop
This surfer is about 60mts (185 feet) away
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
A lion shot at about 20mts (65 feet) cropped a little.
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
Cheetah shot at over 24mts (75 feet) cropped
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
![original.jpg[img]](https://pbase.com/lance_b/image/170176996/original.jpg[img])
Last edited:
sid_19911991
Well-known member
I had the both 500 f4G VR and it was a good lens, but other than the f4 advantage, I think the 500 f5.6 PF is a better lens, which I now have.
I think the "not at all sharp at distance greater than 60-80 feet or so when shot at f5.6" is an AF fine tune issue. Do not have any such issue with my Z7 and Z7II.
This was shot at over 800mts (2,500 feet) and is tack sharp:
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
a 100% crop
This surfer is about 50mts (160 feet) away
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
A lion shot at about 30mts (95 feet) cropped a little.
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
Cheetah shot at over 30mts (95 feet) cropped
Z7 + 500 pf at f5.6
Nice & sharp.
Yeah it could be.
I am getting the Z9, hope the 500 pf is sharper on that.
I did do the manual fine tune stuff at about 50 feet or so.
The 500PF is an engineering marvel in my opinion. When there is considerable distance between subject and background I can't tell any difference in the images from this lens and my big glass (600E and 400E). I rented the 500G once and know that it is a sweet lens also but if I had a choice it would be the 500PF. With the weight and size similar to a 70-200 2.8 it is a great option. On the D500 the FOV is 750 mm which is an amazing range for a hand holdable lens!