Should buy 500mm PF with wiped letters, or look for other options?

[nikon7777]

Hello.

I’ve been considering buying a 500mm PF lens for a while now. There’s a seller who has one, but he mentioned that the white lettering on the barrel for the switches (like VR and autofocus) is missing because he used insect repellent, which removed the all the lettering. He says there are no other optical issues.

My plan is to use the 500mm for about a year before selling it to upgrade to a 600mm or 800mm lens. I want to avoid any situation that might make it hard to resell.

If I check other sale forums, it is being sold around 1500/1600 for very nice condition. How much do you think the missing lettering would affect the price? Are most buyers hesitant about this type of issue? The seller hasn’t provided a price yet, but I’d like to set a limit on what I’m willing to pay.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[Wanderer]

Unless lens elements were marinated with insect repellent, it is only cosmetic issue. But clearly the price should be slightly lower, maybe EX- condition if it is otherwise flawless.

 

[Topper1946]

Hello.

I’ve been considering buying a 500mm PF lens for a while now. There’s a seller who has one, but he mentioned that the white lettering on the barrel for the switches (like VR and autofocus) is missing because he used insect repellent, which removed the all the lettering. He says there are no other optical issues.

My plan is to use the 500mm for about a year before selling it to upgrade to a 600mm or 800mm lens. I want to avoid any situation that might make it hard to resell.

If I check other sale forums, it is being sold around 1500/1600 for very nice condition. How much do you think the missing lettering would affect the price? Are most buyers hesitant about this type of issue? The seller hasn’t provided a price yet, but I’d like to set a limit on what I’m willing to pay.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks!

FWIW. I would think twice about this lens. how well do you know the seller and how the equipment is treated And where it has been. I know there is a big difference in price but the lens will lose even more value in a year. Why not just bite the bullet and get the better lens now.

 

[nikon7777]

FWIW. I would think twice about this lens. how well do you know the seller and how the equipment is treated And where it has been. I know there is a big difference in price but the lens will lose even more value in a year. Why not just bite the bullet and get the better lens now.

I don't know him and he is just another member on other forum.

Hard to believe that such nice lens can go even more down, but yes, we never know. Can hit $1000 or less if demand is poor. I wanted 600mm, but I didn't find it than $3900 anywhere, i.e. around $2500 more than 500 pf. Another idea was to get 400 f/4.5 with TC, which I can get in $2500. But I am biased and debating on this side. I read softness with TC on some reviews, and some say it is almost as sharpness as 500 pf

 

[ButlerKid]

I don't know him and he is just another member on other forum.

Hard to believe that such nice lens can go even more down, but yes, we never know. Can hit $1000 or less if demand is poor. I wanted 600mm, but I didn't find it than $3900 anywhere, i.e. around $2500 more than 500 pf. Another idea was to get 400 f/4.5 with TC, which I can get in $2500. But I am biased and debating on this side. I read softness with TC on some reviews, and some say it is almost as sharpness as 500 pf

I have the 400 f4.5 and often use it with the 1.4 tele. It takes the tele really, really well such that I find it hard to see much difference at all compared to shooting it bare.

 

[wotan1]

I have the 400mm f4.5. I shot it alongside of my photo buddy who had the 500mm pf.

The 400mm is still one of my favorite lenses, very light and compact and easy to use. I was also able to use it with a 1.4x tc and also use dx mode or tc to get more reach.

In comparing it with the 500mm I thought I was fully satisfied with the quality of my images when compared to the 500mm. However, for bird photography the 400mm lacks reach for some subjects and I needed something longer. The 500 has a bit more reach than the 400 and my photo buddy was getting a bit farther than I could get with my 400.

Yet in the end both of us concluded we needed greater reach than ether of those two lenses could produce.

My photo buddy went with the 600mm pf and I eventually settled on the 800mm pf.

I would suggest thinking long term. The problem with the 500 is that it is an F mount lens and you are eventually going to have to or want to sell it. My photo buddy had problems with having to use the FTZ adapter and the balance of the combination when working with a Z camera.

Think about where you want to end up eventually. My photo buddy bought the 600m pf eventually and he now uses it as his primary birding lens with the 1.4x tc. I eventually went for the 800mm pf and it has become my favorite birding lens.

In either case whether you get a 600 or 800 you are going to need something shorter for closer subjects. The 400mm f4.5 is a really nice lens. I find it works really well with my 800mm pf and between them I can get to almost anything that is reachable.

You can also consider one of the zooms, either the 100-400 or 180-600. Many people work with a long prime and use the zoom for shorter subjects. I would suggest you take a good look at Steve Perry's comparative test results for the 180=600. He compares it with several of the lenses discussed here.

My advice is get something you will want to keep and build from there.

I would also stay away from the 500 with the defaced letters. You are buying a potentially heavily used lens try to find something that shows less evidence of wear.

 

[Jules795]

My own 500PF has the same issue with smeared letters from DEET. I did it when I was attacked by No SeeUms on Sanibel. I just grabbed the DEET and rubbed my neck and never knew it would cause damage.
My 500PF rarely comes off my camera.
I had a fantasy of cleaning up the smeared paint and repainting neatly.

 

[nikon7777]

I have the 400mm f4.5. I shot it alongside of my photo buddy who had the 500mm pf.

The 400mm is still one of my favorite lenses, very light and compact and easy to use. I was also able to use it with a 1.4x tc and also use dx mode or tc to get more reach.

In comparing it with the 500mm I thought I was fully satisfied with the quality of my images when compared to the 500mm. However, for bird photography the 400mm lacks reach for some subjects and I needed something longer. The 500 has a bit more reach than the 400 and my photo buddy was getting a bit farther than I could get with my 400.

Yet in the end both of us concluded we needed greater reach than ether of those two lenses could produce.

My photo buddy went with the 600mm pf and I eventually settled on the 800mm pf.

I would suggest thinking long term. The problem with the 500 is that it is an F mount lens and you are eventually going to have to or want to sell it. My photo buddy had problems with having to use the FTZ adapter and the balance of the combination when working with a Z camera.

Think about where you want to end up eventually. My photo buddy bought the 600m pf eventually and he now uses it as his primary birding lens with the 1.4x tc. I eventually went for the 800mm pf and it has become my favorite birding lens.

In either case whether you get a 600 or 800 you are going to need something shorter for closer subjects. The 400mm f4.5 is a really nice lens. I find it works really well with my 800mm pf and between them I can get to almost anything that is reachable.

You can also consider one of the zooms, either the 100-400 or 180-600. Many people work with a long prime and use the zoom for shorter subjects. I would suggest you take a good look at Steve Perry's comparative test results for the 180=600. He compares it with several of the lenses discussed here.

My advice is get something you will want to keep and build from there.

I would also stay away from the 500 with the defaced letters. You are buying a potentially heavily used lens try to find something that shows less evidence of wear.

I think the title is better now after my edits

Here’s my situation: I currently have a sharp 300mm PF lens, but I don't want to spend over $4000 on a 600mm lens. I’m considering a two-lens kit for wildlife photography that I can carry daily and handhold for longer periods. While the 180-600mm lens is nice, it doesn't meet my portability needs. The 100-400mm is sharp up to 350mm, but it tends to get soft with a teleconverter at the longer end. I’m thinking of sell my 300mm PF and buy 100-400mm, which I hope will be a wise choice.

I also considered renting a 500mm lens for the long term and eventually selling it when I’m ready to upgrade to a better option in the Z system.

Are you using the 100-400mm as well, or does it overlap with your 400mm f/4.5? When you used a teleconverter with the 400mm f/4.5, did you notice any significant softness compared to your friend's 500mm PF? I believe adding a prime lens to the 100-400mm setup would serve me well until I embark on a serious wildlife trip.

 

[wotan1]

I think the title is better now after my edits

Here’s my situation: I currently have a sharp 300mm PF lens, but I don't want to spend over $4000 on a 600mm lens. I’m considering a two-lens kit for wildlife photography that I can carry daily and handhold for longer periods. While the 180-600mm lens is nice, it doesn't meet my portability needs. The 100-400mm is sharp up to 350mm, but it tends to get soft with a teleconverter at the longer end. I’m thinking of sell my 300mm PF and buy 100-400mm, which I hope will be a wise choice.

I also considered renting a 500mm lens for the long term and eventually selling it when I’m ready to upgrade to a better option in the Z system.

Are you using the 100-400mm as well, or does it overlap with your 400mm f/4.5? When you used a teleconverter with the 400mm f/4.5, did you notice any significant softness compared to your friend's 500mm PF? I believe adding a prime lens to the 100-400mm setup would serve me well until I embark on a serious wildlife trip.

I don't have the 100-400 when the time came for a choice I chose the 400mm 4.5 because of its higher IQ, I much prefer primes in the longer telephoto ranges than zooms. Primes handle tc's better and they also can crop farther.

I already had the 70-200mm f2.8. That lens is incredibly sharp for a zoom lens and I could either crop/dx or use a tc to get between 200 and 400,

My sense of the 400mm 4.5 was that it worked just fine with the 1.4x teleconverter and with that image I could still crop substantially and get nice detail on bird feathers. I was able to cover quite a bit beyond its native focal length.

In my experience the ombination of the 70-200 f2.8 and the 400mm f4.5 worked well together.

If you are going to seriously get into birding you are going to need to reach 800mm. The options for getting there are limited and they are not cheap. The 180-600 doesn't do well with teleconverters so that is not a good choice. Your mid priced options are the 600mm pf and 800mm pf. The 400mm and 600mm super primes will cost you 14 grand and higher. Of course you could save money by going for a used F mount.

No lens I am aware of will shoot at an aperture wider than f5.6 at 800mm. The 800mm pf is only a third stop narrower at 6.3. In terms of sharpness the 800mm pf is as sharp or sharper than anything out there with the sole exception of the F mount 800mm f5.6, a lens that is the most expensive in the Nikon lineup. At the same time the 800 pf is lighter, less expensive and easier to handle.

If you went for a 600 pf you would start at f6.3 and by adding a 1.4x tc you are out to F9. Should you use a 2x tc on the 600 you are now at f13 and you begin to lose autofocus capability.

 

[Lance B]

I do not know about getting the 500 pf with the letters wiped off. It might be a great lens but it might be further contaminated with the insect repellent. I wouldn't advise you one way or the other on that.

If you need reach, the 500 pf is an excellent incredibly sharp lens and can be used with the 1.4x TCIII for a fantastic very sharp 700 f8. In fact, the 500 pf + 1.4x TCIII was so good that I questioned me putting my name down for the 800 pf when it was first announced. I did end up getting the 800pf because it was 800mm over 700mm and f6.3 as well. The 800 was a tad sharper but not that much. If I was on a budget, I would have certainly just stuck with the 500 pf and used the 1.4x TCIII.

Some sample images of the 500pf + 1.4x TCIII all shot on Z9 or Z8:

1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso900

1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso4000

1/800s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso1400

1/400s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso1600

1/400s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso125

1/640s f/10.0 at 700.0mm iso250

 

[ButlerKid]

If you want to buy and hold the lens for a long time, it might be worth a good reduction in price.

If you want to buy and then sell it in a year or so....do you want to be in the position of explaining the condition of the lens? I wouldn't.............

"Date the camera body - but marry the lens! " Long time advice regarding how to spend one's money............

 

[NorthernFocus]

I do not know about getting the 500 pf with the letters wiped off. It might be a great lens but it might be further contaminated with the insect repellent. I wouldn't advise you one way or the other on that.

If you need reach, the 500 pf is an excellent incredibly sharp lens and can be used with the 1.4x TCIII for a fantastic very sharp 700 f8. In fact, the 500 pf + 1.4x TCIII was so good that I questioned me putting my name down for the 800 pf when it was first announced. I did end up getting the 800pf because it was 800mm over 700mm and f6.3 as well. The 800 was a tad sharper but not that much. If I was on a budget, I would have certainly just stuck with the 500 pf and used the 1.4x TCIII.

Some sample images of the 500pf + 1.4x TCIII all shot on Z9 or Z8:

1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso900

1/320s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso4000

1/800s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso1400

1/400s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso1600

1/400s f/8.0 at 700.0mm iso125

1/640s f/10.0 at 700.0mm iso250

Ditto pretty much everything Lance said. D500/500PF is an incredible combination. That said I wouldn't take a chance on one that is known to have been exposed to deet. But we each operate with our own ideas of risk.

 

[DavidT]

Hello.

I’ve been considering buying a 500mm PF lens for a while now. There’s a seller who has one, but he mentioned that the white lettering on the barrel for the switches (like VR and autofocus) is missing because he used insect repellent, which removed the all the lettering. He says there are no other optical issues.

My plan is to use the 500mm for about a year before selling it to upgrade to a 600mm or 800mm lens. I want to avoid any situation that might make it hard to resell.

If I check other sale forums, it is being sold around 1500/1600 for very nice condition. How much do you think the missing lettering would affect the price? Are most buyers hesitant about this type of issue? The seller hasn’t provided a price yet, but I’d like to set a limit on what I’m willing to pay.

What are your thoughts?

Thanks!

Depends on the price but there has been so many of them at significant discounts unless the lens is significantly cheaper than those you will have a much harder time selling it. I’d go to KEH and act as if you’re selling it. Put in the lens condition and see what they will give you for it. I bet you will be shocked how little it will be in that condition. Don’t pay more than that!

 

[nikon7777]

Thank you for all your suggestions; they’ve been a great help!

I’m not set on buying the 500PF, but I noticed its price is already low. I thought if that is just cosmetic, I might be able to get it for an even better price.

As Lance mentioned, the lens may be further contaminated (BTW, amazing images), and ButlerKid pointed out that when I eventually sell it, it might be hard to explain that the issues are just cosmetic. Given that, I think I’ll skip buying it from that seller.

If I decide to go with the 500PF instead of the 400mm f/4.5 + TC1.4 (which I’m still debating), I’ll look for other sellers.

@DavidT, Keh quoted under $500, but I’m not sure if that’s realistic! MPB, on the other hand, offers $885 for one in good condition. Will look for other sellers.

 

[boviscopophobic]

For what it's worth, my 500 PF has also lost most of its lettering, but I never use DEET, and never sprayed any insect repellent directly on the lens. Some combination of picaridin, sweat, and/or rubbing when walking around was responsible.