Two Osprey
p.1 #1Two Osprey
First dad flew over while fishing. Then a little while later his surviving chick flew in and landed on the perch that's part of the nest. I had to use foot zoom to fit him in the frame.
Comments and suggestions welcome,
Morris
Ps. I've slightly lightened the dark feathers in the last two images per NVM's suggestion as he correctly pointed out that feather detail was lacking.
1) Dad
2) The fledgling
3)
4)
Edited on Aug 29, 2026 at 11:01 AM · View previous versions
Comments and suggestions welcome,
Morris
Ps. I've slightly lightened the dark feathers in the last two images per NVM's suggestion as he correctly pointed out that feather detail was lacking.
1) Dad
X-H2S XF500mmF5.6 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x lens 700mm f/8.0 1/3200s 1600 ISO +0.3 EV
2) The fledgling
X-H2S XF500mmF5.6 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x lens 700mm f/8.0 1/8500s 1600 ISO -1.0 EV
3)
X-H2S XF500mmF5.6 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x lens 700mm f/8.0 1/7500s 1600 ISO -0.7 EV
4)
X-H2S XF500mmF5.6 R LM OIS WR + 1.4x lens 700mm f/8.0 1/8000s 1600 ISO -0.7 EV
Edited on Aug 29, 2026 at 11:01 AM · View previous versions
Aug 27, 2026 at 06:25 PM
p.1 #2Two Osprey
Very nice, Morris.
Love the sharp detail and stark contrast in these images. No. 4 is a standout to me.
I also like #2, but in my mind I think it would really work well in a square crop with the fledgling's head at the 'Rule of Thirds' upper right intersection. It would crop some of the tail, but I think it would still be very effective. Just a suggestion if you wanted to play with it.
Greg
Love the sharp detail and stark contrast in these images. No. 4 is a standout to me.
I also like #2, but in my mind I think it would really work well in a square crop with the fledgling's head at the 'Rule of Thirds' upper right intersection. It would crop some of the tail, but I think it would still be very effective. Just a suggestion if you wanted to play with it.
Greg
Aug 27, 2026 at 08:29 PM
p.1 #5Two Osprey
the darks are way too dark. its obviously sunny and bright weather, yet can't see feather detail?
Aug 29, 2026 at 08:20 AM
p.1 #6Two Osprey
n.v.m. wrote:
the darks are way too dark. its obviously sunny and bright weather, yet can't see feather detail?
Bless your heart.
Greg
the darks are way too dark. its obviously sunny and bright weather, yet can't see feather detail?
Bless your heart.
Greg
Aug 29, 2026 at 08:38 AM
p.1 #7Two Osprey
gmccroskery wrote:
Very nice, Morris.
Love the sharp detail and stark contrast in these images. No. 4 is a standout to me.
I also like #2, but in my mind I think it would really work well in a square crop with the fledgling's head at the 'Rule of Thirds' upper right intersection. It would crop some of the tail, but I think it would still be very effective. Just a suggestion if you wanted to play with it.
Greg
Thank you Greg,
I love contrast and kept the dark feathers quite dark. For the second image I went with a leading lines composition using the wing coming out of the right corner to lead to the face. The eye and mouth are also very close to the top thirds line which also helps get the viewer to look at the face. Your approach is perfect for the square Instagram look.
---------------------------------------------
Dave_E wrote:
Very nice Morris, the last one is my favorite.
Dave
Thank you Dave
---------------------------------------------
G.E. Smith wrote:
Great set Morris. Really like the last image.
Greg
Thank you Greg
---------------------------------------------
n.v.m. wrote:
the darks are way too dark. its obviously sunny and bright weather, yet can't see feather detail?
Thank you,
I love contrast and left the dark feathers fairly dark to exploit the contrast that we naturally see on an osprey. Do you see the feather detail on the top of the wing in the second image? That's the look I was after. Looking at the last I agree there could be a bit more feather detail in that one. Are you viewing on a hardware calibrated monitor? I look forward to your answers as I'm considering reprocessing.
Morris
Very nice, Morris.
Love the sharp detail and stark contrast in these images. No. 4 is a standout to me.
I also like #2, but in my mind I think it would really work well in a square crop with the fledgling's head at the 'Rule of Thirds' upper right intersection. It would crop some of the tail, but I think it would still be very effective. Just a suggestion if you wanted to play with it.
Greg
Thank you Greg,
I love contrast and kept the dark feathers quite dark. For the second image I went with a leading lines composition using the wing coming out of the right corner to lead to the face. The eye and mouth are also very close to the top thirds line which also helps get the viewer to look at the face. Your approach is perfect for the square Instagram look.
---------------------------------------------
Dave_E wrote:
Very nice Morris, the last one is my favorite.
Dave
Thank you Dave
---------------------------------------------
G.E. Smith wrote:
Great set Morris. Really like the last image.
Greg
Thank you Greg
---------------------------------------------
n.v.m. wrote:
the darks are way too dark. its obviously sunny and bright weather, yet can't see feather detail?
Thank you,
I love contrast and left the dark feathers fairly dark to exploit the contrast that we naturally see on an osprey. Do you see the feather detail on the top of the wing in the second image? That's the look I was after. Looking at the last I agree there could be a bit more feather detail in that one. Are you viewing on a hardware calibrated monitor? I look forward to your answers as I'm considering reprocessing.
Morris
Aug 29, 2026 at 08:42 AM
p.1 #8Two Osprey
if you're dialing down your exposure compensation to protect the whites like i see you are, you then need to recover or lift the darks in post. i don't think you did.
and of course i have a calibrated monitor. do you ask that to people who say "nice photo"?
and of course i have a calibrated monitor. do you ask that to people who say "nice photo"?
Aug 29, 2026 at 08:59 AM
p.1 #9Two Osprey
n.v.m. wrote:
if you're dialing down your exposure compensation to protect the whites like i see you are, you then need to recover or lift the darks in post. i don't think you did.
and of course i have a calibrated monitor. do you ask that to people who say "nice photo"?
Your impute is greatly appreciated. I did bring up the dark areas a touch and am doing it a bit more for the third and forth photos.
Morris
if you're dialing down your exposure compensation to protect the whites like i see you are, you then need to recover or lift the darks in post. i don't think you did.
and of course i have a calibrated monitor. do you ask that to people who say "nice photo"?
Your impute is greatly appreciated. I did bring up the dark areas a touch and am doing it a bit more for the third and forth photos.
Morris
Aug 29, 2026 at 10:00 AM
|
p.1 #11Two Osprey
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.
Eric
Eric
Aug 30, 2026 at 08:52 AM
p.1 #12Two Osprey
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!
Aug 30, 2026 at 09:24 AM
p.1 #13Two Osprey
Really outstanding Morris!
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Aug 30, 2026 at 02:02 PM
p.1 #14Two Osprey
Ted ellis wrote:
Excellent captures Morris. #4 Iis also my favorite.
Thank you Ted
---------------------------------------------
Erictator wrote:
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.
Eric
Thank you Eric,
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
louie champan wrote:
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!
Thank you Louie,
I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
bs kite wrote:
Really outstanding Morris!
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Thank you Robert,
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
Morris
Excellent captures Morris. #4 Iis also my favorite.
Thank you Ted
---------------------------------------------
Erictator wrote:
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.
Eric
Thank you Eric,
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
louie champan wrote:
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!
Thank you Louie,
I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
bs kite wrote:
Really outstanding Morris!
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Thank you Robert,
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
Morris
Aug 30, 2026 at 03:06 PM
p.1 #15Two Osprey
morris wrote:
Thank you Ted
---------------------------------------------
EricThank you Eric,
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
Thank you Louie,
I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
RobertThank you Robert,
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my...Show more →
I like "foot zoom".
. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?
I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible.
180-600 advantage is that I can easily pull back toward 200 and adjust from there... no foot zoom.
FWIW the Maximum Reproduction Ratio of the 180-600 is 0.21; MRR of 500PF is 0.18 (as an example - the MRR for the 105 macro is 1.0)
What parts of Alaska are you going to?
Robert
Ted ellis wrote
Excellent captures Morris. #4 Iis also my favorite.---------------------------------------------
Erictator wrote
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.Eric
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
louie champan wrote
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
bs kite wrote
Really outstanding Morris!I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my...Show more →
I like "foot zoom".
. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible.
180-600 advantage is that I can easily pull back toward 200 and adjust from there... no foot zoom.
FWIW the Maximum Reproduction Ratio of the 180-600 is 0.21; MRR of 500PF is 0.18 (as an example - the MRR for the 105 macro is 1.0)
What parts of Alaska are you going to?
Robert
Aug 31, 2026 at 07:37 AM
p.1 #16Two Osprey
bs kite wrote:
Thank you Ted
---------------------------------------------
EricThank you Eric,
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
Thank you Louie,
I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
RobertThank you Robert,
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
MorrisI like "foot zoom".. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?
I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible. ...Show more →
Places we are visiting in Alaska:
Anchorage
Seward
Kenai Fords, NP
Denali NP
Fairbanks
One of our goals is for my wife to see the Northern Lights. I've been to Alaska before, it's her first trip there.
Morris
morris wrote
Ted ellis wrote
Excellent captures Morris. #4 Iis also my favorite.---------------------------------------------
Erictator wrote
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.Eric
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
louie champan wrote
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
bs kite wrote
Really outstanding Morris!I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
Morris
. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible. ...Show more →
Places we are visiting in Alaska:
Anchorage
Seward
Kenai Fords, NP
Denali NP
Fairbanks
One of our goals is for my wife to see the Northern Lights. I've been to Alaska before, it's her first trip there.
Morris
Aug 31, 2026 at 09:04 AM
p.1 #17Two Osprey
Hi Morris. I have said this before. The only thing I think I am an "expert" at is knowing what I like. What I like maybe different than what another likes. Like you Morris ,I like some contrast especially in an image with black and white in it.
I think these look pretty good. I don't " always" want to sacrifice my deep blacks in order to pull more detail. Some times I do. This is just my thoughts on this subject. Plenty of room for more opinions in my way of thinking.
Respectfully
John
I think these look pretty good. I don't " always" want to sacrifice my deep blacks in order to pull more detail. Some times I do. This is just my thoughts on this subject. Plenty of room for more opinions in my way of thinking.
Respectfully
John
Aug 31, 2026 at 09:56 AM
p.1 #18Two Osprey
morris wrote:
Thank you Ted
---------------------------------------------
EricThank you Eric,
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
Thank you Louie,
I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
RobertThank you Robert,
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
MorrisI like "foot zoom".. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?
I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible.
180-600 advantage is that I can easily pull back toward 200 and adjust from there... no foot zoom.
FWIW the Maximum Reproduction Ratio of the 180-600 is 0.21; MRR of 500PF is 0.18 (as an example - the MRR for the 105 macro is 1.0)
What parts of Alaska are you going to?
RobertPlaces we are visiting in Alaska:
Anchorage
Seward
Kenai Fords, NP
Denali NP
Fairbanks
One of our goals is for my wife to see the Northern Lights. I've been to Alaska before, it's her first trip there.
Morris
I'm very envious of your Alaska trip, Morris. Two Denali NP 'must do's' are a visit to the dog sled kennels to watch the dog sled demonstration (year round) and the amazing park bus ride to Wonder Lake.
Regardless, have a great time and blessed travel too!
Greg
bs kite wrote
morris wrote
Ted ellis wrote
Excellent captures Morris. #4 Iis also my favorite.---------------------------------------------
Erictator wrote
These really pop Morris, nice work and framing, I enjoy seeing their antics.Eric
Osprey are very dramatic birds and the strong range in shades allows for great contrast which I took advantage of in this set.
---------------------------------------------
louie champan wrote
Great set Morris, but that second image is way over the top!I'm with you on the second and don't disagree with those that like the 4th best.
---------------------------------------------
bs kite wrote
Really outstanding Morris!I have 2 questions please...
1. What is a foot zoom?
2. The more I see your work, the more I wonder if maybe I should use my 500PF (and 1.4) as my go-to more often. The question: With the prime the photographer cannot frame or compose the entire subject all the time, often clipping parts of the subject. What are your viewpoints on that?
Robert
Foot zoom is when one moves closer or further from the subject to compose or in movie speak dolly in and out.
Nikon's 500 PF is very similar to the to Fuji's XF 500mm in performance and weight and even have the same f5.6 maximum aperture. I used to use the 500 PF with my Fuji X-H2s and the bokeh, is very similar. The XF 500mm may have a slight advantage in resolution as it's not a Fresnel lens. I love the look a prime lens produces and in most cases a prime of the same focal length as a zooms maximum magnification will have a faster aperture allowing for better subject isolation and shooting in less light. The prime will usually have higher resolution and image quality. The disadvantage of a prime is that you can find your self too close yet in most cases this is not what happens with it more common that you need more reach so you reach for a TC and/or crop. Too combat the too close situation I use my 70-300mm on a second body. I only do this when I know that I'll be too close such as when I'm photographing flocks of birds. If you are trying to document everything you see a zoom do yet if you want the best photos the prime can sometimes deliver what the zoom can not.
Are you up in Alaska? We depart NYC on Saturday and I'm very much looking forward to the trip.
Morris
. "Movie speak dolly in. and out". What does that mean?I'm in Maine.
I am going to try this 500PF today. Yes, one challenge will be when near the MFD. And there will be lots of clipping and cropping. But the reduced weight is wonderful. And this prime is sharper than my 180-600 zoom. I have it coupled: Z8, FTZ adapter, 1.4 TC, 500PF. I have done tests in the past and inarguably, the 500PF/TC1.4 images are just as sharp as the bare 500PF. Of course there is a difference, but it is indiscernible.
180-600 advantage is that I can easily pull back toward 200 and adjust from there... no foot zoom.
FWIW the Maximum Reproduction Ratio of the 180-600 is 0.21; MRR of 500PF is 0.18 (as an example - the MRR for the 105 macro is 1.0)
What parts of Alaska are you going to?
Robert
Anchorage
Seward
Kenai Fords, NP
Denali NP
Fairbanks
One of our goals is for my wife to see the Northern Lights. I've been to Alaska before, it's her first trip there.
Morris
I'm very envious of your Alaska trip, Morris. Two Denali NP 'must do's' are a visit to the dog sled kennels to watch the dog sled demonstration (year round) and the amazing park bus ride to Wonder Lake.
Regardless, have a great time and blessed travel too!
Greg
Aug 31, 2026 at 10:00 AM
p.1 #19Two Osprey
johnohio wrote:
Hi Morris. I have said this before. The only thing I think I am an "expert" at is knowing what I like. What I like maybe different than what another likes. Like you Morris ,I like some contrast especially in an image with black and white in it.
I think these look pretty good. I don't " always" want to sacrifice my deep blacks in order to pull more detail. Some times I do. This is just my thoughts on this subject. Plenty of room for more opinions in my way of thinking.
Respectfully
John
Thank you John,
One of the fun things about photography is it's an art and with art come choices made to taste.
Morris
Edited on Aug 31, 2026 at 03:53 PM · View previous versions
Hi Morris. I have said this before. The only thing I think I am an "expert" at is knowing what I like. What I like maybe different than what another likes. Like you Morris ,I like some contrast especially in an image with black and white in it.
I think these look pretty good. I don't " always" want to sacrifice my deep blacks in order to pull more detail. Some times I do. This is just my thoughts on this subject. Plenty of room for more opinions in my way of thinking.
Respectfully
John
Thank you John,
One of the fun things about photography is it's an art and with art come choices made to taste.
Morris
Edited on Aug 31, 2026 at 03:53 PM · View previous versions
Aug 31, 2026 at 11:58 AM
p.1 #20Two Osprey
I'm very envious of your Alaska trip, Morris. Two Denali NP 'must do's' are a visit to the dog sled kennels to watch the dog sled demonstration (year round) and the amazing park bus ride to Wonder Lake.
Regardless, have a great time and blessed travel too!
Greg
Thank you Greg,
The dog sled demo is already on our list. There was a landslide on the road up to Wonder Lake and the road is not passible beyond mile 43. We are planning the bus ride yet can't reach Wonder Lake. My wife's friend got there via float plane so it's possible yet bucking tickets is a challenge. We will see if we can find something.
Morris
Aug 31, 2026 at 12:04 PM