You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
The 500mm PF has some really nice Bokeh considering its an f5.6 lens.
- Thread starter sh1209
- 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).
Nice image, and yes, nice bokeh too. I've never been qualified enough on bokeh to evaluate a lens' bokeh qualities versus another. Some of that changed after I read Steve's teachings on how to achieve good bokeh, and while some lenses render bokeh better that others, for me (and in line with Steve's recommendations) the easiest way to achieve a nice, creamy bokeh is to be close to the subject while having the background far away. The closer the focus distance and the farther the background is from the subject, the better the bokeh. Wide open apertures also help, of course.
The examples below are from my Nikkor 200-500mm F/5.6 lens zoomed to 500mm. Subjects were 11 feet from the camera while the background (winter dry forest behind my home) was about 40 feet away. Aperture in the first image was F/7.1. I did no processing to achieve this bokeh.
Aperture was F/8 on the one below
The examples below are from my Nikkor 200-500mm F/5.6 lens zoomed to 500mm. Subjects were 11 feet from the camera while the background (winter dry forest behind my home) was about 40 feet away. Aperture in the first image was F/7.1. I did no processing to achieve this bokeh.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Aperture was F/8 on the one below
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Marcus Slade
Active member
Great shots, Koos, and well explained. Though I have my sights on a 500mm PF, perhaps, like you, I've taken more shots with my 200-500 than the rest of my lenses...combined. I think I'm catching up with my 600 however. Nevertheless, as you said, I consistently find that the first determinant of good bokeh is the distance from subject to background, relative to the distance from camera to subject. When the first is long and the second shorter (as in your shots) the results of the background are frequently "creamy"...even when stopped down a bit.
robertrear
Active member
Taken with a Nikon D500 along with a Nikon 500mm PF.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Last edited:
Rainbow One
Member
Hi sh1209
would love to see some more images shot with the 500 PF
would love to see some more images shot with the 500 PF
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
Rainbow One
Member
They are al lovely images, it’s a lens I inspire to have because of the weight and image quality 
I love it so far. I had some hiccups with the focus ring at first but since have begun to love the lens. I have had numerous surgeries on my arms from a workplace injury and finding something lighter than a 200-500 was my main goal. I still have the 200-500 nikon but I’m probably going to sell it just because of the weight of it. I think the 200-500, or at least the copy I have is a phenomenal lens. I have no issues whatsoever with the image quality, it’s just the weight and size that hinders me. This lens is really not much different than carrying my 70-200. The focus speed is very noticeably faster with the 500 PF. I got a good deal on mine from a seller on eBay. It honestly looks like it’s never been on a camera and is eight months old. I got it for $2900 which is a substantial savings over new.They are al lovely images, it’s a lens I inspire to have because of the weight and image quality
Andy Work
Well-known member
D500 with Sigma 500mm @ f5
