cohenfive
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.43 #1 · "Official" Nikon 500 f/5.6E PF Discussion and Image Thread | |
OwlsEyes wrote:
Christian,
I think for some the low light VR woes are a real problem, while for others it's a "meh" issue. In my case, I almost never shoot handheld. I like to work with my tripod (like, as in actually enjoy) and rarely think about shooting handheld unless I am in a situation where it is that or nothing.
90% of my decision to go the 500mm PF was economic... while the size reduction is a bonus, mine was more about available choices. As I stated a few years back when I bought the 200-500VR, I would have gladly paid a $1000 or more for the same lens with weather sealing, pro AF, and a better hood design. At $1400, the lens is a bargain, a gateway drug into Nikon, and good enough for most photographers. There is more than enough resolution throughout the range to produce huge prints and get work published. I, however, wanted a lens that could handle my style of shooting... rain, snow, frigid, and humid conditions. Our 200-500 has become my wife's darling, and she does not shoot enough in the ugly weather for it to become a problem.
With the 200-400VR in my bag, my options were a 500mm f4G or Sigma 500mm f4OS. Both of these lenses are as large as the 200-400, and the starting price was $4000 for a Ex (or worse condition) used lens. If the 500mmPF was not sharper than my 200-400mm lens at f/4, I would have returned the lens and dealt with a used 500mm f/4G. Fortunately, the 500mmPF allows me to get the focal length I wanted with only a stop of light sacrifice. The lens offers me the pro AF, pro weather sealing, sharp optics, and better lens hood in a new condition with a 5 year warranty for for less than a used 500mm f/4G... VR or no VR, the lens meets a niche that I wanted to fill at a price that I can afford.
I think if I owned a 500mm f/4G or 500mm f/4FLE, I too would have absolutely no interest in the lens. It is a lot of money for a redundant optic, especially if you also own a 200-500VR. Rather than this PF, the 300mmPF would be the perfect partner for a 500mm f4. So, in my mind, it makes a lot of sense that you are not as excited about the 500PF as others are.
cheers,
bruce...Show more →
Bruce, that is my combo exactly...my normal wildlife setup is to have one body strapped to my 300pf (my favorite lens), with the other body attached to my 500e fl. I will probably try the 500pf at some point, but the lens I was personally really hoping for was a 600pf 5.6. That I would have bought for sure. The 500pf for me doesn't do much that I already can't do. The other lens I'd really like to see is a higher quality 100-400/80-400 than is currently offered by tamron, sigma or nikon. I have the tamron and it is really good for the money, but there are times when I need a zoom shorter than 500mm and there really isn't a great one on the market that you can take on trips.
|
