Took a few video clips of hornbills with 500/5.6PF and Z7 on a tripod. I only just started to play a bit with video lately so pretty much full automatic mode on Z7 but it was fun
MedicineMan404 wrote:
'This is me' , did you get the Fuji 200/2
Well my Nikon saga contiues, from an e-mail today-
'Response from Ajamu J.
Thank you for calling Nikon
As per our conversation, Service has gotten back to me an we have found your products.....'
So in a big way they admit to having lost a big box with a body/lens/TC inside and the mandatory
3 inches of expanding foam for $117 shipping fee via FedEx.
I guess I should be thankful
Damn, I thought my 500mm PF order will be fulfilled. Glad they found your package.
I traded my 2 months-old PF for a 200mm f2.0 VRII due to my addition of my first newborn. I rented the 200mm f2.0 and fell in love. With the newborn, I'm not able to go out and use the PF as much as I would like. And I just bought a 600E in January so I can't afford both at this time.
Wow. Amazing setup! Let us know about the performance and also about this gorgeous setup details. 😳
gilgabo wrote:
We all know how the 500PF performs terrestrially, but now we shall see how it performs celestially.....balanced and waiting for sun down.
gilgabo wrote:
We all know how the 500PF performs terrestrially, but now we shall see how it performs celestially.....balanced and waiting for sun down.
gilgabo wrote:
We all know how the 500PF performs terrestrially, but now we shall see how it performs celestially.....balanced and waiting for sun down.
Yes! I'm really interested to see how the 500PF performs. I have a 600E but it would require a cumbersome and expensive mount for the long exposures needed for deep sky objects. PLEASE post results and your opinions, no matter what they may be.
fpoet wrote:
Superb shots. I am not usually a TC user, however the feather detail in the second image is impressive. I assume this is uncropped or lightly cropped?
Thanks. Here are the originals for both shots so you can see how much is cropped. I'm not always convinced that the TC adds much vs a deeper crop without it. But I continue to use TCs a fair amount. The AF takes a big hit with this combo...I notice a lot less consistency in perfectly focused shots when the TC is on.
arbitrage wrote:
Thanks. Here are the originals for both shots so you can see how much is cropped. I'm not always convinced that the TC adds much vs a deeper crop without it. But I continue to use TCs a fair amount. The AF takes a big hit with this combo...I notice a lot less consistency in perfectly focused shots when the TC is on.
You've got a lot more time behind the 500PF than I do Geoff, but I'm thinking the same. If there's enough light, I think it's usually better go with a TC rather than crop, but I have to be on top of my "game" (best technique) to get good results. Though the 500PF seems to take the TC14EIII very well and I have no hesitation to use it for closer subjects, the hit to the AF is really significant, which becomes the limiting factor of whether to use the TC or not.
gilgabo wrote:
We all know how the 500PF performs terrestrially, but now we shall see how it performs celestially.....balanced and waiting for sun down.
Awesome rig. I gave it a shot with my 500 PF over the winter and felt the stars were slightly bloated and the brighter ones were almost made into a double star. Hopefully you're able to get better results.
Glad they found your package. 
