This scenario does result in washed out colours. I noticed similar results myself when shooting into the light. It is possible that nevertheless some backlighting scenarios come out well with the PF lenses, but the parameters need to be determined experimentally. I often am quite pleased with backlit shots as long as the main light is not directly towards the front of the lens.
However, if the brightest light source does illuminate the front element directly, then this kind of a washed out effect is seen. I avoid such scenarios and use the lens where it does well.
In arbitrage's image following your posting, there is a male bushtit (?) which is lit partly from behind (there is a rim light effect); in this case the lens handled the situation well. I would try to find such situations and take advantage of them with this lens. I don't think the front lit images look as nice.
Every lens has its own envelope of best application and then some situations where it doesn't work well. For example, I wouldn't want to try to shoot something flying directly above the photographer with a 3.9kg lens.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
I know old hat to most of you but I never get to see this in the sticks.
https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4828/46902788591_17c203bd4e_h.jpgA collective by MedicineMan4040, on Flickr
I saw some of your very nice images of flocking snow geese and cranes, and noticed that you shoot two set-up's that are on my short-list for replacement of my Pentax DA560: the Nikon D500+500PF, and the Sony A9 (would be Sony A7rIII in my case)+Canon 400DOII+1.4TC.
I seem to have a preference for images of the Canon 400DOII, they simply always look superb. But could you share which combo you like best, IQ wise, AF wise (nót weight wise)? That would be very welcome.
The other candidates on my shortlist are the Sigma 500/f4, but less preferable because the weight is a bit too much for hiking/handheld shooting, and if I can wait long enough: the coming Olympus 150-400 f4.5 with built-in 1.25TC. I am more and more leaning towards mirrorless.
Chris, you are a kind man.
Politely I'm going to bow out of this question and defer to Geoff.
Really my decision on what I pick up on a given day is weight based.
I agree the 400DOii is quite special and other friends have told me they can tell
right away if I shot with the 400 or the 100400FE. So I guess I didn't defer! The 400DOii+1.4TCiii
or 2.0TCiii has better IQ than the 100400GM......but my reality is the 100400GM, even after many firmware updates either Metabones or MC-11 for the 400DOii, the 100400GM still wins on AF/AF-C.
Now ask me down the road when Commlite gets the 500PF up to speed on the a9 and I'll sing a different tune, tune with lyrics like '400DOii has a new home'
Yeah that Oly 150-400 is of keen interest. Wify and I both have M1ii's.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Chris, you are a kind man.
Politely I'm going to bow out of this question and defer to Geoff.
Really my decision on what I pick up on a given day is weight based.
I agree the 400DOii is quite special and other friends have told me they can tell
right away if I shot with the 400 or the 100400FE. So I guess I didn't defer! The 400DOii+1.4TCiii
or 2.0TCiii has better IQ than the 100400GM......but my reality is the 100400GM, even after many firmware updates either Metabones or MC-11 for the 400DOii, the 100400GM still wins on AF/AF-C.
Now ask me down the road when Commlite gets the 500PF up to speed on the a9 and I'll sing a different tune, tune with lyrics like '400DOii has a new home'
Yeah that Oly 150-400 is of keen interest. Wify and I both have M1ii's....Show more →
Thanks for your response, and it sounds alltogether obvious that the Sony 100-400GM would have better AF than the Canon 400DOII on the Sony A9.
But what I was really curious about though, is how the Sony A9+400DOII+1.4TC, compares to the Nikon D500+500PF, IQ wise and AF wise , but ignoring the weight advantage of the latter, if possible at all.
Would you care to say something about that?
I was 45-55 yards away, maybe more. I don't think I'd gotten anything post the huge crop necessary to get something with the FF body.
Others may disagree, but look at how many of us want an a7-like APS-C, it's the pixel density.
And this is why for the most part at Bosque I had the a9 +100-400 slung on one shoulder and the
D500+500PF+1.4TCiii on the other. One for close to mid and the other for the long shots.
I used the 400DOii/1.4TCiii in the mornings for the F4-F5.6
Chris you have seen many examples of the FE100-400GM with 2.0TC. Just think, what if the a7000/mini-a9 can AF at F11 ??
I know, that's 800mm effective before applying the 1.5 cropper math, and at 1200mm effective all kinds of atmospherics kick in In that case hope for air with no dust or moisture!
You know I was just considering the D500 an interim until the Sony cropper mentioned above gets here, but the D500 and D850 really aren't that bad with the 300 and 500PFs WEIGHTWISE ha! You knew I'd go there! Just bring ear-plugs for the shutter sound
MedicineMan404 wrote:
OK a9+400DOii+1.4 vs D500+500PF, IQ totally depends on distance/how close will you be or how close can you get to the subject of interest
I was 45-55 yards away, maybe more. I don't think I'd gotten anything post the huge crop necessary to get something with the FF body.
Others may disagree, but look at how many of us want an a7-like APS-C, it's the pixel density.
And this is why for the most part at Bosque I had the a9 +100-400 slung on one shoulder and the
D500+500PF+1.4TCiii on the other. One for close to mid and the other for the long shots.
I used the 400DOii/1.4TCiii in the mornings for the F4-F5.6
Chris you have seen many examples of the FE100-400GM with 2.0TC. Just think, what if the a7000/mini-a9 can AF at F11 ??
I know, that's 800mm effective before applying the 1.5 cropper math, and at 1200mm effective all kinds of atmospherics kick in In that case hope for air with no dust or moisture!
You know I was just considering the D500 an interim until the Sony cropper mentioned above gets here, but the D500 and D850 really aren't that bad with the 300 and 500PFs WEIGHTWISE ha! You knew I'd go there! Just bring ear-plugs for the shutter sound ...Show more →
Thanks! Wonderful performance at 700mm/f8!
You are confirming what I am leaning towards since the 500mmPF was released. It is a stunning lens going by the images posted and the reports of users, and although I still rate the Canon 400DOII a bit higher (contrast and "look" wise), that is also a much more expensive lens.
I guess I should let go of my intent of my next wildlife body being mirrorless (ideally a Sony A7000), and just settle with a Nikon D500. It should be an enormous upgrade from my Pentax K3II anyway. And yes, no A9 silent shutter mode. But Sony will not make a 500PF eq. and Nikon will quite likely sooner or later come with a mirrorless D500.
The 500PF is not available yet here, but it will be in 3-6 months, and if I can get it before may I'll be fine. Going by your words, there is little lacking with the D500+500PF(+1.4TC) combo!
ChrisMak wrote:
Thanks! Wonderful performance at 700mm/f8!
You are confirming what I am leaning towards since the 500mmPF was released. It is a stunning lens going by the images posted and the reports of users, and although I still rate the Canon 400DOII a bit higher (contrast and "look" wise), that is also a much more expensive lens.
I guess I should let go of my intent of my next wildlife body being mirrorless (ideally a Sony A7000), and just settle with a Nikon D500. It should be an enormous upgrade from my Pentax K3II anyway. And yes, no A9 silent shutter mode. But Sony will not make a 500PF eq. and Nikon will quite likely sooner or later come with a mirrorless D500.
The 500PF is not available yet here, but it will be in 3-6 months, and if I can get it before may I'll be fine. Going by your words, there is little lacking with the D500+500PF(+1.4TC) combo!
I won’t speak to the lenses being discussed, but I moved from a Pentax K3 ii to the D500 and it is definitely an upgrade in the autofocus department. The ergonomics and IQ of the Pentax are great, but it’s not in the same league for wildlife and the DA 560 loses its appeal in a world where the 500 PF exists (in my opinion).
ChrisMak wrote:
Thanks for your response, and it sounds alltogether obvious that the Sony 100-400GM would have better AF than the Canon 400DOII on the Sony A9.
But what I was really curious about though, is how the Sony A9+400DOII+1.4TC, compares to the Nikon D500+500PF, IQ wise and AF wise , but ignoring the weight advantage of the latter, if possible at all.
Would you care to say something about that?
Chris
I feel more confident that I won't totally miss a sequence with the D500/500PF like is possible with the adapted 400DOII because if you get too far out of focus the adapted combo isn't fast at getting back. However, if both combos have acquired the target and are actively tracking it I think the A9/400DOII will get a better hit rate with less small focus shifts that DSLRs like to do. Still I'd reach for my Nikon combo over the Sony adapted for challenging BIF.
What works the best for AF is A9 with 100-400GM...hands down that combo beats the other two in the consistency of sharp shots. I'm sure the 400/2.8 GM would be even better.
IQ wise it is a total wash....I prefer 20-24MP FF sensors like the A9, D5 and 1DX2 for the overall tonality and noise control so that often favours the A9 for me. I think the 500PF and 400DOII are very close....not using them on the same body I can't say for sure. I guess I can adapt the 500PF to my A9 and MF it to try and compare to the 400DOII on a test subject. Overall I think the 400DOII has the edge. Especially with TCs added...there I think the 400DOII pulls ahead of the 500PF with a TC.
The 500PF with 1.4TC takes a big hit to AF...not so much to IQ. I've shot BIF and been successful with the 500PF/1.4TC but the AF drive speed slows noticeably.
Still reach is king in my world and that is why my Nikon kit is still going strong next to the Sony kit....until Sony give me an A9 tech high-density sensor (either A7000 or A9R) then I won't invest any further with them and any big lenses.
40Driggs wrote:
I won’t speak to the lenses being discussed, but I moved from a Pentax K3 ii to the D500 and it is definitely an upgrade in the autofocus department. The ergonomics and IQ of the Pentax are great, but it’s not in the same league for wildlife and the DA 560 loses its appeal in a world where the 500 PF exists (in my opinion).
It does, and it has. The DA560 has given me opportunities (reach) and IQ that I value, but the form factor (long), the weight (ok. for handheld shooting, but less so for long hikes), the AF limitations and the color abberations all make the Nikon 500PF much more desireable, although I have to admit, after the Sony A7rII, a dslr no longer appeals to me. So with the Nikon 500PF, I am betting on a future mirrorless D500, and the D500 until then.
arbitrage wrote:
I feel more confident that I won't totally miss a sequence with the D500/500PF like is possible with the adapted 400DOII because if you get too far out of focus the adapted combo isn't fast at getting back. However, if both combos have acquired the target and are actively tracking it I think the A9/400DOII will get a better hit rate with less small focus shifts that DSLRs like to do. Still I'd reach for my Nikon combo over the Sony adapted for challenging BIF.
What works the best for AF is A9 with 100-400GM...hands down that combo beats the other two in the consistency of sharp shots. I'm sure the 400/2.8 GM would be even better.
IQ wise it is a total wash....I prefer 20-24MP FF sensors like the A9, D5 and 1DX2 for the overall tonality and noise control so that often favours the A9 for me. I think the 500PF and 400DOII are very close....not using them on the same body I can't say for sure. I guess I can adapt the 500PF to my A9 and MF it to try and compare to the 400DOII on a test subject. Overall I think the 400DOII has the edge. Especially with TCs added...there I think the 400DOII pulls ahead of the 500PF with a TC.
The 500PF with 1.4TC takes a big hit to AF...not so much to IQ. I've shot BIF and been successful with the 500PF/1.4TC but the AF drive speed slows noticeably.
Still reach is king in my world and that is why my Nikon kit is still going strong next to the Sony kit....until Sony give me an A9 tech high-density sensor (either A7000 or A9R) then I won't invest any further with them and any big lenses....Show more →
Thanks for sharing this.
As said above, I am betting on a future Nikon mirrorless D500 when chosing the 500PF, as my mindset has shifted away from dslr's. Actually, before the 500PF was announced (pretty much unexpected after all) I had it worked out: the Canon 400DOII with converters and mc-11 on my Sony A7rII until the Sony high end APSC would arrive. With the delay in the Sony A7000, the announcement of the 500PF, I am making the choice over again. Knowing that Nikon has solidly stepped into the mirrorless world make it a luxury choice I guess. I am sure the future mirrorless D500 will be superb with the 500PF.
Speaking of luxury b.t.w.: I used to shoot Olympus 4/3 for years, and saw the announcement of the 150-400 with 1.25 TC built in. It might just develop superb AF, especially with future firmware updates, but that lens is too far from release....
ChrisMak wrote:
It does, and it has. The DA560 has given me opportunities (reach) and IQ that I value, but the form factor (long), the weight (ok. for handheld shooting, but less so for long hikes), the AF limitations and the color abberations all make the Nikon 500PF much more desireable, although I have to admit, after the Sony A7rII, a dslr no longer appeals to me. So with the Nikon 500PF, I am betting on a future mirrorless D500, and the D500 until then.
Chris
I have (and love) an A7r iii and understand your affinity for mirrorless.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
First semi-decent shot of something moving with the 850. I added the grip but I dont think it is as
fast at the d500 in acquisition.
I may have missed it, but does anyone have an idea when this lens will be available in the U.S.?
I have the D500 which I love but would love to pick this lens up. Thank you.
I would think it is; the question is how extreme the crop is.
Like I said before, the contrast and colours tend to be washed out when shooting into the light with PF lenses. In this shot the background is the light source.
However, this is not the only kind of photograph one may want to make.
You are being unnecessarily harsh on this lens.
Christian H wrote:
Is this cropped? The IQ is terrible for ISO 400 and what everybody keeps insisting is such a great lens.
Christian H wrote:
Is this cropped? The IQ is terrible for ISO 400 and what everybody keeps insisting is such a great lens.
Why all of the 500PF hate ChristianH?... I am curious about your perspective here, because you seem to dislike the lens without shooting it.
I have seen quite a few sub-par photos taken with the 500mm f/4G, legendary 800mm f/5.6E, 600mm f/5.6E, yet these other less than amazing photos get a pass from you and other photographers. Nobody claims that the 300mm f/2.8VRii is crap when someone shares a less than stellar image.
For the record, I own and shoot the 500PF, a 200-500 f/5.6, an 80-400G, and a 200-400G vr1. There are times when I make some pretty amazing photos with each of these lenses, and there are other times when my photos are pure crap.
Interestingly, you seem to be one of a very few vocal minority that is seeking to diminish the value of the 500PF... that's cool as the web is a great place to air opinions and grievances, but from my experience... the 500PF is a real winner and has exceeded my personal expectations. I am only wishing that I have had more opportunities to really get the most out of the 500PF this winter.
wells1118 wrote:
I may have missed it, but does anyone have an idea when this lens will be available in the U.S.?
I have the D500 which I love but would love to pick this lens up. Thank you.
Waiting lists are pretty large at the popular dealers. If you get lucky maybe you can find one at a local dealer.
For example I was in Hunts last weekend and I asked about the lens. They have 54 people on the wiat list and they said the get 2-3 lenses in every 2-3 weeks.
In that case hope for air with no dust or moisture!
