p.12 #1 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
DGettisNC wrote:
Yes, people need to get low and keep an eye on their backgrounds, distance to subject, distance to background, etc. That is universal.
But again, this thread is simply about images/discussion of the lens, not showing off what people think are their best wildlife shots. And you also kind of answered your own question with your 1st post on page 10 - "eagerness to use the lens"
Also, if everyone only posted what they consider "perfect" shots on these types of threads, then how would the people that are interested in it or researching it know where that lens has limitations or weaknesses? Would you prefer everyone find that out only after purchasing it? If I am interested in something and am doing my research, I dont only want to know the positives.
I just went through the 1st 12 pages of the Sony 600/4 thread and there are definitely some images with not-very-pleasing backgrounds/OOF rendering as well (even very "PF-ish" if I may say). And there are some not exactly sharp images.
And there are some that look great too.
Thanks for the response and I understand and respect your point re the purpose of the thread. Don't fully agree but that is OK and not relevant. I think you missed the point a bit about the lens. We all know the limitations of this lens. If you owned or have shot the 300 or 500PF (I had both) then you will know what you are buying. A super sharp, super small, super light lens that does not perform the same in all situations as it's much more expensive counterparts. And it should not perform the same for the price you are paying. So what does that mean, it means that you can't shoot it the same. It is even more important to pay attention to your background distance and your shooting angle. You are limited to PF lenses that are less forgiving in certain situations and 6.3 which makes it even less forgiving. As Chris has said not all lenses at the same focal length have the same rendering.
And this is in no way a Sony vs Nikon thing. Yes there are plenty of examples of images in every thread on FM that could use some improvement. I pointed George to my IG page when I was challenged to his childish duel and there are images posted there with both Sony and Nikon. I doubt you could tell which image is from which manufacturer unless I specifically state it.
p.12 #2 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
So are you telling us what and how to shoot and what to post and not to post then? I think we all know what we’re buying and the thousands on the waiting list also know what they’re buying.
A 800mm that is hand holder with only 1/3 stop slower than any 800mm prime or 600mmf4 with 1.4XTC. That is exactly what I bought and that is exactly what I got.
I don’t think you’ve grasped the idea of f6.3 at 800mm. Not everyone can get close to the subject and often time TCs are used on a 600f4 which makes it an 840 f5.6. You do realize that f6.3 is only 1/3 stop slower than f5.6 right?
p.12 #3 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
this is me wrote:
So are you telling us what and how to shoot and what to post and not to post then? I think we all know what we’re buying and the thousands on the waiting list also know what they’re buying.
A 800mm that is hand holder with only 1/3 stop slower than any 800mm prime or 600mmf4 with 1.4XTC. That is exactly what I bought and that is exactly what I got.
I don’t think you’ve grasped the idea of f6.3 at 800mm. Not everyone can get close to the subject and often time TCs are used on a 600f4 which makes it an 840 f5.6. You do realize that f6.3 is only 1/3 stop slower than f5.6 right? ...Show more →
Can you believe the nerve that I have to make a suggestion on how to use a lens on a thread dedicated to that lens
I don't even know how to respond to the rest of what you are saying other than to say that yes I understand basic photography concepts. Does that make you happy to know?
Jeez you would think that people would take a bit of constructive criticism with a bit more grace. Sorry but if I had spent $6,500 on a lens and was getting the results posted here I would be eager for some suggestions on how to improve and get better results. But I guess if you are happy then so be it. However when posting on a public forum there will be people that have the nerve to have an opinion that differs from yours
p.12 #4 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
this is me wrote:
So are you telling us what and how to shoot and what to post and not to post then? I think we all know what we’re buying and the thousands on the waiting list also know what they’re buying.
A 800mm that is hand holder with only 1/3 stop slower than any 800mm prime or 600mmf4 with 1.4XTC. That is exactly what I bought and that is exactly what I got.
I don’t think you’ve grasped the idea of f6.3 at 800mm. Not everyone can get close to the subject and often time TCs are used on a 600f4 which makes it an 840 f5.6. You do realize that f6.3 is only 1/3 stop slower than f5.6 right? ...Show more →
One of the more useful things I found last night was the "Hide Me" button, works wonders!
p.12 #5 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
I allowed my GAS to subside a bit and decided to cancel the pre-order for now (after waiting 1.5 months). Realized that 500PF for my use while I'm just starting to learn how to photograph wildlife is more than enough and putting this amount of $ into 800PF might not be the smartest choice (for me). I'll re-assess once Nikon has more availability (in a year or two?). Might just get 200-600 once it finally materializes (again - if it's available for actual purchase).
p.12 #6 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
ChrisMak wrote:
Yes, of course.
The point though is not at all that people are looking for something bad to say about the 800PF.
Like any new lens it is scrutinized, and if many agree on something particular, then it is usually at least partially true.
Like I said, the images where the PF type bokeh will surface are limited, and you can even make sure it doesn't happen at all by simply not taking such images.
I disagree though about the 600GM, even though good images depend on the photographer, subject and the occasion, the 600GM adheres to all requirements for an immaculate super telelens. That does not mean though, that the Nikon 800PF may not have the edge when it comes to color rendering or contrast. The Sony 600GM appears to be very neutral, like all Sony GM lenses. It seems Sony has this neutral look as a priority.....Show more →
I'll grant that some lenses render backgrounds differently, but that's mainly in the portraiture realm. When comparing a 600mm f/4 and an 800mm f/6.3, you're not going to find a "vast" difference. You can't fight math. There *might* be a *slight* difference when the background is not far enough to be completely blown out, but I'd bet there will be no discernible difference without unreasonable pixel peeping. If one is even slightly conscientious about their backgrounds, that situation is unlikely to even occur very often.
If you want proof that the Sony produces nervous and busy backgrounds, peruse the Sony 600mm f/4 forum for a couple minutes; you'll find a multitude of photos with terrible backgrounds.
p.12 #7 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
aboutthelight wrote:
Thanks for the response and I understand and respect your point re the purpose of the thread. Don't fully agree but that is OK and not relevant. I think you missed the point a bit about the lens. We all know the limitations of this lens. If you owned or have shot the 300 or 500PF (I had both) then you will know what you are buying. A super sharp, super small, super light lens that does not perform the same in all situations as it's much more expensive counterparts. And it should not perform the same for the price you are paying. So what does that mean, it means that you can't shoot it the same. It is even more important to pay attention to your background distance and your shooting angle. You are limited to PF lenses that are less forgiving in certain situations and 6.3 which makes it even less forgiving. As Chris has said not all lenses at the same focal length have the same rendering.
And this is in no way a Sony vs Nikon thing. Yes there are plenty of examples of images in every thread on FM that could use some improvement. I pointed George to my IG page when I was challenged to his childish duel and there are images posted there with both Sony and Nikon. I doubt you could tell which image is from which manufacturer unless I specifically state it.
Like you said we just view the thread differently I guess. Plus Its a public, open message board filled with people in different stages of photography. Some just starting, some intermediate, some pros, retired, people trying different genres, etc. I kind of expect to see everything from images that are OOF with a little camera shake to incredibly sharp, clean photos. You should see some of the pics in some of the Z9 Facebook groups I’m in 😆 At least this board seems to be overall a lot more quality than those groups (there are some great pics in there too, but on average it’s much better here).
Personally I’ve been shooting for 3 years now, so still early enough where I’m trying out different settings/techniques/etc so I end up taking a lot of pics, even if I know it’s not the best scene/background. I’m slowly getting more selective with what I’ll share/post, but will still post some images that don’t have the best background if it’s either really sharp and/or detailed OR an interesting sighting/action OR just something I consider hard to get (like I’ve been working on small birds in flight lately).
p.12 #8 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Aside from the ergonomics (and price) for those who have used both the z and the 5.6 version, is there any noticeable difference in image quality between the two? Does the Fresnel lens hold up to traditional lenses?
p.12 #9 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
I've seen a lot of people discussing 800 PF vs 600 GM + 1.4x.
Here's a better comparison (same subject and background) that one I saw posted earlier in the thread.
(Feel free to delete if off topic, but I guess this is also technically a discussion thread).
Both images are absolutely tack sharp (the posted images don't appear great on the post as I had to downsize to 1 MP), I might give the 800 PF a very slight edge on sharpness as the 1.4x TC does rob some IQ.
p.12 #10 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
JJacob wrote:
Aside from the ergonomics (and price) for those who have used both the z and the 5.6 version, is there any noticeable difference in image quality between the two? Does the Fresnel lens hold up to traditional lenses?
I've used them both, it certainly holds up sharpness wise but the images have a flatter look to them if I had to choose a word to describe it. Sold the PF, kept the E.
p.12 #11 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
The only thing I don't like about this lens is that I cannot find one to buy. Decent images from it look extraordinarily good to me. There are many such examples in this thread.
Edit:
If I may, I post a couple of links to the blog of a countryman of mine who was one of the first to get this lens. Indeed his daughter, a renowned seabird scientist in this part of the world, featured in Nikon's publicity campaign at the launch of the lens. You will note, amongst other things, the lens's prowess photographing swallows in flight.
p.12 #12 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
aboutthelight wrote:
Are people really happy with the performance and sharpness of this lens? I would think it would be on par with the 500PF and 300PF in terms of sharpness and ease of handling. When viewing on my 5k imac many of the images posted seem to have very unflattering backgrounds and I am not blown away at all with the sharpness either. Maybe just some growing pains with the lens or eagerness to use and post so not shooting in optimal conditions? Hope I don't sound too much like a bozo but for $6,500 I would want better results than what I am seeing. Hope there is not too much hate flowing after this but just being honest ...Show more →
The only sharp images on my 5K display from these forums appear to be ones hosted externally at higher resolutions. I would look elsewhere if you want to see full resolution images.
And as for the backgrounds - blame the photographers don't blame the lens - 800 f/6.3 will be perfectly fine with a little background separation.
p.12 #13 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
I cancelled my 800 pf order for the Z9 and bought a 400 GM instead to complement my 600 GM I already have on the A1.I still don’t feel confident about the AF performance of the Z9 compared the a1.
I will await further FW updates and decide later if I will invest in longer telenses from Nikon or not.
p.12 #15 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Beautiful shot!!!! I can’t wait to get mine. I haven’t heard of anyone getting theirs since the first batch came out. Hoping for some news soon. I hate waiting. Lol.
Nikon1960 wrote:
A shot of a Black-Crowned Night-Heron from my first outing with my new lens!
I absolutely love the lens, it solves just about every single complaint I had with the old 800mm f/5.6E when adapted to the Z9.
p.12 #17 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
If only these did not grow into annoying geese...
May 19, 2022 at 09:13 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.12 #18 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
aboutthelight wrote:
Thanks for the response and I understand and respect your point re the purpose of the thread. Don't fully agree but that is OK and not relevant. I think you missed the point a bit about the lens. We all know the limitations of this lens. If you owned or have shot the 300 or 500PF (I had both) then you will know what you are buying. A super sharp, super small, super light lens that does not perform the same in all situations as it's much more expensive counterparts. And it should not perform the same for the price you are paying. So what does that mean, it means that you can't shoot it the same. It is even more important to pay attention to your background distance and your shooting angle. You are limited to PF lenses that are less forgiving in certain situations and 6.3 which makes it even less forgiving. As Chris has said not all lenses at the same focal length have the same rendering.
And this is in no way a Sony vs Nikon thing. Yes there are plenty of examples of images in every thread on FM that could use some improvement. I pointed George to my IG page when I was challenged to his childish duel and there are images posted there with both Sony and Nikon. I doubt you could tell which image is from which manufacturer unless I specifically state it.
I think you have missed two basic points. First, some of the images in this thread are not the best work of the photographers and they were posted because the lens is new and they were excited to post images with it. Sure, they could have culled more but this lack of culling and posting less than optimal images happens with every new lens. I don't think it says anything about this particular lens that some or even most of the images aren't that strong. Second, you seem to misunderstand that an 800 f/6.3 lens actually has very shallow depth of field and has only a tiny bit more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at this focal length. In that way it is very different from other PF lenses. You have repeatedly put it into the same category as the 300 PF and 500 PF, but those lenses have a whole stop more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at those focal lengths, whereas the 800 PF only has a third of a stop more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at 800mm. That is a notable difference and I don't think it makes sense to put it in the same category as other PF for that reason.
From my perspective the first point I raise makes your whole critique invalid. Over time we will no doubt see stronger images even from the very people who have posted so far. That is to be expected and to make a global judgment of a lens from the relatively few images posted so far is in my view a rush to judgment and likely very misleading.You of course can make that judgment and no one will stop you, but it is also true that some of us won't see anything persuasive in this judgment nor see it as sound or well thought out.
p.12 #19 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
One quick image from the back yard this morning. Similar to yesterday with the 400 but different lighting today, also a little too much Exposure Comp. Ran out of time today!
p.12 #20 · Official 800PF image and discussion thread
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think you have missed two basic points. First, some of the images in this thread are not the best work of the photographers and they were posted because the lens is new and they were excited to post images with it. Sure, they could have culled more but this lack of culling and posting less than optimal images happens with every new lens. I don't think it says anything about this particular lens that some or even most of the images aren't that strong. Second, you seem to misunderstand that an 800 f/6.3 lens actually has very shallow depth of field and has only a tiny bit more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at this focal length. In that way it is very different from other PF lenses. You have repeatedly put it into the same category as the 300 PF and 500 PF, but those lenses have a whole stop more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at those focal lengths, whereas the 800 PF only has a third of a stop more depth of field than the fastest lenses available at 800mm. That is a notable difference and I don't think it makes sense to put it in the same category as other PF for that reason.
From my perspective the first point I raise makes your whole critique invalid. Over time we will no doubt see stronger images even from the very people who have posted so far. That is to be expected and to make a global judgment of a lens from the relatively few images posted so far is in my view a rush to judgment and likely very misleading.You of course can make that judgment and no one will stop you, but it is also true that some of us won't see anything persuasive in this judgment nor see it as sound or well thought out....Show more →
Here is exactly what I said to start this "Are people really happy with the performance and sharpness of this lens? I would think it would be on par with the 500PF and 300PF in terms of sharpness and ease of handling. When viewing on my 5k imac many of the images posted seem to have very unflattering backgrounds and I am not blown away at all with the sharpness either. Maybe just some growing pains with the lens or eagerness to use and post so not shooting in optimal conditions? Hope I don't sound too much like a bozo but for $6,500 I would want better results than what I am seeing. Hope there is not too much hate flowing after this but just being honest"
I raised the issue of growing pains and eagerness to post with the new lens because it is obvious that there are less than high quality images being posted. I also raised the issue that the lenses should be equally as sharp and easy to use as the 300 and 500 PF but that I was not seeing similar results as some of the great images posted in those threads.
With regards to depth of field I have never said that an 800mm lens will have the same DOF as a 300 or 500mm lens. That would be absurd. What I said is that these lenses are particularly susceptible to jittery backgrounds when the subject is too close to the background and people should remember this when out shooting and pay attention to their shooting angles and distance to backgrounds even more because they are shooting with a PF lens. Again I owned the 300 and 500 and shot them in particular situations with careful considerations to the backgrounds and its distance from my subjects. Of course 800mm and 6.3 is different than the others but it is still a PF lens so there are limits to the advantages you mention.
Let me be clear I think that this 800PF is an outstanding lens that will deliver world class results and is incredibly light and hand holdable. In the same way that the 300 and 500PF are benchmarks for affordability and ease of use. Groundbreaking lenses that no other manufacturer has come close to replicating. However after 10 pages of images that look particularly poor in my book I was wondering what others thought or found who were lucky enough to own and shoot this lens. I could never judge a lens that I have not used but I can judge the images I have seen and that is why I asked what I asked and how I asked it. I have owned and shot 600f4's from Canon, Nikon and Sony. I have used them with and without converters thousands of times. I am very well aware of how the focal length and the fstop effect the final product.
I did not nor would I critique this lens, I asked those who own it if they were happy with it because the results being shown were less than stellar. I don't know how to say this any other way
I'll re-assess once Nikon has more availability (in a year or two?). 
