NissanPatrol wrote:
I like the 168 more than the pf 500mm F-mount f/5.6
many youtubers including Steve Perry say the 500 is sharper and faster.
I get faster lock to the bird eyes with the 168, or maybe I am doing some thing wrong with the pf 500
I've never owned the 500 PF. By all indications it's a legendary and fantastic lens. Personally, ever since long zooms improved to the point where they may not be quite as good as the primes, but are certainly close, that's been my preference. I believe this started with the introduction of the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma 150-600 S. I've heard way too many reports from owners who jointly owned the 500 PF and 200-500 that claim it was very hard to tell the difference between the two lenses. And the general consensus now is the 186 is slightly sharper than the 200-500. So it stands to reason that the difference in sharpness between the 186 and the 500 PF is even smaller. This is what has led me to not even consider the 500 PF or the 600 PF. I did own the Nikon 400 4.5 alongside the 186 and decided to keep the zoom and sell the prime. Any slight advantage in sharpness is far outweighed by the flexibility of the zoom for my uses. And swapping out the TC to get the added reach was a pain and also caused me to miss shots. The thought of having to carry two lenses out in the field does not appeal to me at all. And it also negates the size/weight advantage of the PF lenses.
Gary
sum1sgrampa wrote:
I've never owned the 500 PF. By all indications it's a legendary and fantastic lens. Personally, ever since long zooms improved to the point where they may not be quite as good as the primes, but are certainly close, that's been my preference. I believe this started with the introduction of the Nikon 200-500 and the Sigma 150-600 S. I've heard way too many reports from owners who jointly owned the 500 PF and 200-500 that claim it was very hard to tell the difference between the two lenses. And the general consensus now is the 186 is slightly sharper than the 200-500. So it stands to reason that the difference in sharpness between the 186 and the 500 PF is even smaller. This is what has led me to not even consider the 500 PF or the 600 PF. I did own the Nikon 400 4.5 alongside the 186 and decided to keep the zoom and sell the prime. Any slight advantage in sharpness is far outweighed by the flexibility of the zoom for my uses. And swapping out the TC to get the added reach was a pain and also caused me to miss shots. The thought of having to carry two lenses out in the field does not appeal to me at all. And it also negates the size/weight advantage of the PF lenses.
Gary...Show more →
I’ll start this post now, to grab a position, just below Philip and Gary... and then edit as needed.
I have had the 500PF and 200-500 for years now.
Philip’s comment on the 500PF focusing is right.
My 500PF’s huge advantage is its lightweight. It’s a “walk-about” 500. However, I sometimes have fits trying to focus the 500PF, but that may be partly due to my daltonism. Literally, I am blind to the red or green boxes against foliage.
After reading the 2 above posts, I compared the AF of the 500PF to the 200-500. The 500PF AF is “snappy” while the 2-5 is smooth and slower but usually sufficient in speed.
Gary’s post is very informative. I remember when all zooms were too soft. As I look back on my loon work, the 200-500 has been the most valuable of the two above lenses. All my captures of loons "taking to flight" were done with the 2-5 (and it's considered slow to AF?) But its weight is too much. Yes, I can still heft it. No, I do not want to. But I will continue to deal with the weight.... simply because I need the versatility of a super telephoto zoom. In loon work both the watercraft and the loons are always moving.
I’ve combined Gary’s assessment of the 180-600, with Terry Vander Heiden's “deep dive” into it. I’ve been putting off buying this lens. While editing this post, I ordered it. I hope I become as excited about it as everyone is
____________
Here’s an edit after shooting it a few days: Reasons I love it! - I can zoom the entire 200-600 range with just one sweep of my thumb. I shoot long lenses at f8; this lens is very sharp. It has the smoothest VR I've ever experienced. Thanks Nikon for such a great lens at a great price.
