Re: "Official" Nikon 500 f/5.6E PF Discussion and Image Thread
Garuna wrote:
Z 400 can’t replace 500 because it is shorter and requires TC. Its a great optic for someone who wants a 400mm lens.
bs kite wrote:
Some soul who is qualified on MTF charts may feel the need to go deep with a comment here. If you choose to, please back up your comment(s) with a reference(s)
General MTF rule: The closer the lines are to the top, the better.
The MTF's for the 500 PF and 400 4.5 are virtually identical; however, the 500PF may have greater resolving power. The 400 has better bokeh
Conclusion: The 400 4.5 is no sharper than the 500 PF. That's all I need to know. I can change bokeh in the field.
Any *advantages* of one of these lenses over the other are marginal. Translation: If I already own a 500PF, I would be foolish to spend $3200 on this new lens, unless I was willing to leave Nikon f-mount in one complete move. I do not choose to do that.
The big advantage of the 500 PF is that I can continue to use my f-mount glass on the best sensor I have ever used.... my D850. And with the *rock solid* FTZII converter (that has absolutely no play in it whatsoever.... zero!) I can still shoot my 500PF in the mirrorless world. Translation: I have no problem at all with the converter. I see it as an advantage.
Any difficulty I have with mirrorless will be overcome as the days and weeks pass, by me and with the help of other's here. MTF will be posted momentarily. Comments by an experienced reader of MTF's are very welcome. Thanks
Oh, one other thing I will admit to liking about my 500 PF is the Gold Ring toward the big end of the glass. I confess I like it... I really do
And when all things are considered, isn't the Nikon 500 PF the standard for all 500 millimeters among all manufacturers? I am not sure.
Seriously, I do not even like discussing gear. For me, it is about nature. https://itsaboutnature.smugmug.com
But the comparison was brought up today and this is a response.
Robert
I agree with everything stated here. In fact, as someone who owned the 500PF and now uses the 400mm f4.5, I think the 500PF is marginally sharper than the 400mm f4.5 + 1.4x. I owned the 500PF since October 2018, so I am very aware of its capabilities and weakness.
I had a number of reasons for making the switch, none of them had to do with the raw performance of the 500PF.
So why switch...
1. I wanted a slightly faster lens, as a lot of my photography is in very low light.
2. I wanted full Z-system compatibility, as I sold my last DSLR... thus no need for an FTZ.
3. I disliked the bokeh of the 500PF when shooting backlit subjects. This was especially true for subjects in or on water.
4. I wanted to maximize the resale value of the 500PF, as I could foresee its precipitous crash.
5. I prefer the build and design of the Z telephotos.
6. I found the sound of the F-Mount VR to be distracting and loud when shooting during quiet mornings.
regards,
bruce
Jul 23, 2023 at 06:12 AM
Previous versions of OwlsEyes's message #16299528 « "Official" Nikon 500 f/5.6E PF Discussion and Image Thread »
