p.113 #1 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
A few from last week...all with the 1.4TCIII attached. I find this lens really pops stopped down to f/7.1 w/o TC and f/10 with TC. Still good wide open but a nice improvement 2/3rds down.
p.113 #2 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Well you know, as my mind is recalling, this correction (repost) is closer to what I am used to seeing with my naked eye when the sun gets up there a ways.
Very Cool....especially since you told me about that LR feature.
Interesting it fooled me too. If it was not WB then the only other thing I suspected was some iridescence phenom.
I have to get over to LR and see what this feature actually is and if it will work for me.
Will get back to you after I see what I can do over there.
p.113 #4 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I found the WB dropper and have tried many areas on another loon image.
My PSCC will not allow me to use a the white breast even though the RBG values all are the same......98.1.
It tells me to select a darker area.
I know one thing...it is very sensitive to a slight difference in any one of the 3 numbers. I don't think I created an example that is close to what you show in the above image.
p.113 #5 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
bs kite wrote:
Some early loon images of 2017 season.
Does this color look right to you?
I am thinking I might have the WB too warm. What do you think?
Thank you.
Robert
i downloaded 3 pictures, and this is what was wrong.
in Photoshop.
1 duplicate layer.
2 go to filter>blur>average
3 Go to adjustment layer, and choose Levels
Take the eyedropper "gray point".
4 and click in the picture, you get then a nice gray picture.
5 In your layer panel set the duplicated layer off
p.113 #6 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Thank you for the response. I intend to give this a go, but first I must get today's images processed and out. Will soon be back to you on this. thanks again
p.113 #8 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Exceptional set...esp the 2nd one...the sharpness is astounding....!!! @ f6.3.
One thing that comes to my mind after viewing the excellent postings under the thread, that IF (assuming that) we did not know about this lens (ie/ or for some reason 200-500 f5.6 's existence is unknown), would anyone believe that these images were not taken with any of those 500f4 lenses out there...??
Or I am over reacting to the IQ of this stellar lens...??
p.113 #9 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
First outing since moving from another great combo, the Oly EM 1-MkII with Pany 100-400(800mm eq, max). I think this kit has a few small advantages for me. Both are amazing for the price!
Greg
p.113 #10 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
PIXPHATIC wrote:
Exceptional set...esp the 2nd one...the sharpness is astounding....!!! @ f6.3.
One thing that comes to my mind after viewing the excellent postings under the thread, that IF (assuming that) we did not know about this lens (ie/ or for some reason 200-500 f5.6 's existence is unknown), would anyone believe that these images were not taken with any of those 500f4 lenses out there...??
Or I am over reacting to the IQ of this stellar lens...??
First, you do deserve a response from me. I want to thank you very much for your kind words.
Honestly, I am hoping others who own the 200-500 will express their opinions on the second part of your comment. They do have quality opinions on this lens....because they use it a lot.
I am working on my own response. I promise I will give it a go. Just very busy.
p.113 #11 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
One thing that comes to my mind after viewing the excellent postings under the thread, that IF (assuming that) we did not know about this lens (ie/ or for some reason 200-500 f5.6 's existence is unknown), would anyone believe that these images were not taken with any of those 500f4 lenses out there...??
Or I am over reacting to the IQ of this stellar lens...??
Granted it's sharp and has lovely bokeh for an f5.6 zoom BUT there's no mistaking the
500 f4's AF speed and stop faster IQ/bokeh. I shoot both as well as the 150-600 S, so
the right tool for the task at hand comes into play (provided you've got the coin)
p.113 #12 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
trenchmonkey wrote:
Granted it's sharp and has lovely bokeh for an f5.6 zoom BUT there's no mistaking the
500 f4's AF speed and stop faster IQ/bokeh. I shoot both as well as the 150-600 S, so
the right tool for the task at hand comes into play (provided you've got the coin)
...yes thats for sure, thats why I said ' these images were not taken with any of those 500f4 lenses'....and they (images) only depicts the IQ & bokeh ( to a large extent), but cannot speak of the AF speed......
p.113 #14 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
PIXPHATIC wrote:
Exceptional set...esp the 2nd one...the sharpness is astounding....!!! @ f6.3.
One thing that comes to my mind after viewing the excellent postings under the thread, that IF (assuming that) we did not know about this lens (ie/ or for some reason 200-500 f5.6 's existence is unknown), would anyone believe that these images were not taken with any of those 500f4 lenses out there...??
Or I am over reacting to the IQ of this stellar lens...??
Strictly looking at the images (and not usage), at the same apertures, I would bet nobody could reliably tell a difference between the output of a 500/4 and a 200-500 all else being equal. And definitely not at the low resolutions most often posted on the web. I am regularly shocked at how sharp my 200-500 is, and it is sharpest wide open as far as I can tell.
Of course F4, faster AF, tank-like build quality, and near perfect optics are all virtues of the 500/4 that can make all the difference depending on your needs. For an $8,900 savings and the convenience of a zoom though I think many of us are OK with the #2 spot
p.113 #15 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
Strictly looking at the images (and not usage), at the same apertures, I would bet nobody could reliably tell a difference between the output of a 500/4 and a 200-500 all else being equal. And definitely not at the low resolutions most often posted on the web. I am regularly shocked at how sharp my 200-500 is, and it is sharpest wide open as far as I can tell.
Of course F4, faster AF, tank-like build quality, and near perfect optics are all virtues of the 500/4 that can make all the difference depending on your needs. For an $8,900 savings and the convenience of a zoom though I think many of us are OK with the #2 spot ...Show more →
...and along with the savings, a bonus is the versatility of a zoom, which in some situations is a 'great to have' feature.
p.113 #17 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
Strictly looking at the images (and not usage), at the same apertures, I would bet nobody could reliably tell a difference between the output of a 500/4 and a 200-500 all else being equal. And definitely not at the low resolutions most often posted on the web. I am regularly shocked at how sharp my 200-500 is, and it is sharpest wide open as far as I can tell.
Of course F4, faster AF, tank-like build quality, and near perfect optics are all virtues of the 500/4 that can make all the difference depending on your needs. For an $8,900 savings and the convenience of a zoom though I think many of us are OK with the #2 spot ...Show more →
After reading CanadaMark's comment, I thought I might not write mine. It is so close to how I feel about the 200-500.
Add this: In my older age (older and weaker) I find there's now the available resources to order.....even say a new 600 FL ........... if I convinced myself I absolutely had to have it. Which I have not and will not (at least not yet)
So why not?
I am a nature photojournalist and the 200-500 does everything I want in a supertele already..... more than any of the super telephotos do.
So it is just about what Mark said.... I am one of those in the #2 spot.
I am not normally a tripod person. So I can carry this 200-500 with this Kirk foot and hoist it to my face easily.. And in the canoe the BlackRapid strap is installed to avoid deep 6'ing it.
Nope Nikon ....... my next move is still going to be your new D820, that I find I can't stand waiting for.
Robert
p.113 #19 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
Strictly looking at the images (and not usage), at the same apertures, I would bet nobody could reliably tell a difference between the output of a 500/4 and a 200-500 all else being equal. And definitely not at the low resolutions most often posted on the web. I am regularly shocked at how sharp my 200-500 is, and it is sharpest wide open as far as I can tell.
Of course F4, faster AF, tank-like build quality, and near perfect optics are all virtues of the 500/4 that can make all the difference depending on your needs. For an $8,900 savings and the convenience of a zoom though I think many of us are OK with the #2 spot ...Show more →
Have you compared yours at 5.6 to 7.1? For the first 4 months or more I never bothered even trying to stop it down. I was happy at 5.6. Then a few months ago I was just playing around testing and tried it stopped down. At 7.1 I noticed a significant difference. However, I do think some of that is from increasing DOF and therefore decreasing the small AF focus shifts that sometimes render the eye just slightly out from frame to frame. When 5.6 hits on target it comes very close but in a string of 20 shots you get a lot more keepers and a bit more"bite" at 7.1. At least with my copy of the lens. Brad Hill also found 7.1 to be the sweet spot on his copy.
