Gotta tell ya I知 not all that impressed. To be sure the 500PF looks amazingly small and light but the sample images left a lot to be desired in terms of sharpness/clarity IMO. I cannot believe the 500PF is going to be visibly sharper than the 500E even wide open regardless what the MTF chart suggests. Hit rate was unimpressive too. I知 not suggesting the photog is at fault...looks like the conditions were not ideal, but I have to call it as I see it.
I think I値l wait for Brad Hill痴 assessment.
I think if ultimate sharpness is the key criteria one is seeking, then the 500mm PF may not be the optimal lens. I owned (note past tense) the 300mmPF and recently sold it. I sold it for two reasons... needed some funds to afford my pre-ordered 500mm PF and I had two lenses that already covered the 300mm range.
With the exception of a trip to BC in 2017, my 300mmPF was an orphaned optic. Since I decided to keep my 200-400, it made sense to sell the 300PF and replace it with a 500mmPF that will get a lot more use.
Now to the sharpness point, my 300mmPF was not as sharp at 300mm with my 200-400mm lens. In fact, it was about as sharp as my wife's 200-500VR at 300mm.
I expect that the 500mmPF will be brilliant in good light, but it will be less than great in low to moderate light. However, it is small and can be carried in the same bag with my much heavier 200-400VR. Here portability and the capacity to get to 500mm without a teleconverter (750mm on my D500) is more important to me than ultimate sharpness.
Then again, if you consider what I own in the way of lenses,*... I'm not an ultimate sharpness type of guy... I'm more of a... get the shot type of guy and work with what I've got in post.
As they say... different strokes for different folks.
bruce
* should you care about what we (Tamy and I) carry, here is a list... not one is in the list of Nikon's sharpest/greatest lenses.
Tamy: 20mm f/1.8, 24-120mmf/4VR, 200-500mmVR
Bruce: 16-35VR, 70-200VRf/4, 200-400VRi, ancient 105f/4 AiMicro... soon to arrive (?) 500PF
Gotta tell ya I知 not all that impressed. To be sure the 500PF looks amazingly small and light but the sample images left a lot to be desired in terms of sharpness/clarity IMO. I cannot believe the 500PF is going to be visibly sharper than the 500E even wide open regardless what the MTF chart suggests. Hit rate was unimpressive too. I知 not suggesting the photog is at fault...looks like the conditions were not ideal, but I have to call it as I see it.
I think I値l wait for Brad Hill痴 assessment.
I think if ultimate sharpness is the key criteria one is seeking, then the 500mm PF may not be the optimal lens. I owned (note past tense) the 300mmPF and recently sold it. I sold it for two reasons... needed some funds to afford my pre-ordered 500mm PF and I had two lenses that already covered the 300mm range.
With the exception of a trip to BC in 2017, my 300mmPF was an orphaned optic. Since I decided to keep my 200-400, it made sense to sell the 300PF and replace it with a 500mmPF that will get a lot more use.
Now to the sharpness point, my 300mmPF was not as sharp at 300mm with my 200-400mm lens. In fact, it was about as sharp as my wife's 200-500VR at 300mm.
I expect that the 500mmPF will be brilliant in good light, but it will be less than great in low to moderate light. However, it is small and can be carried in the same bag with my much heavier 200-400VR. Here portability and the capacity to get to 500mm without a teleconverter (750mm on my D500) is more important to me than ultimate sharpness.
Then again, if you consider what I own in the way of lenses,*... I'm not an ultimate sharpness type of guy... I'm more of a... get the shot type of guy and work with what I've got in post.
As they say... different strokes for different folks.
bruce
* should you care about what we (Tamy and I) carry, here is a list... not one is in the list of Nikon's sharpest/greatest lenses.
Tamy: 20mm f/1.8, 24-120mmf/4VR, 200-500mmVR
Bruce: 16-35VR, 70-200VRf/4, 200-400VRi, ancient 105f/4 AiMicro... soon to arrive (?) 500PF
Gotta tell ya I知 not all that impressed. To be sure the 500PF looks amazingly small and light but the sample images left a lot to be desired in terms of sharpness/clarity IMO. I cannot believe the 500PF is going to be visibly sharper than the 500E even wide open regardless what the MTF chart suggests. Hit rate was unimpressive too. I知 not suggesting the photog is at fault...looks like the conditions were not ideal, but I have to call it as I see it.
I think I値l wait for Brad Hill痴 assessment.
I think if ultimate sharpness is the key criteria one is seeking, then the 500mm PF may not be the optimal lens. I owned (note past tense) the 300mmPF and recently sold it. I sold it for two reasons... needed some funds to afford my pre-ordered 500mm PF and I had two lenses that already cover the 300mm range.
With the exception of a trip to BC in 2017, my 300mmPF was an orphaned optic. Since I decided to keep my 200-400, it made sense to sell the 300PF and replace it with a 500mmPF that will get a lot more use.
Now to the sharpness point, my 300mmPF was not as sharp at 300mm with my 200-400mm lens. In fact, it was about as sharp as my wife's 200-500VR at 300mm.
I expect that the 500mmPF will be brilliant in good light, but it will be less than great in low to moderate light. However, it is small and can be carried in the same bag with my much heavier 200-400VR. Here portability and the capacity to get to 500mm without a teleconverter (750mm on my D500) is more important to me than ultimate sharpness.
Then again, if you consider what I own in the way of lenses,*... I'm not an ultimate sharpness type of guy... I'm more of a... get the shot type of guy and work with what I've got in post.
As they say... different strokes for different folks.
bruce
* should you care about what we (Tamy and I) carry, here is a list... not one is in the list of Nikon's sharpest/greatest lenses.
Tamy: 20mm f/1.8, 24-120mmf/4VR, 200-500mmVR
Bruce: 16-35VR, 70-200VRf/4, 200-400VRi, ancient 105f/4 AiMicro... soon to arrive (?) 500PF
Gotta tell ya I知 not all that impressed. To be sure the 500PF looks amazingly small and light but the sample images left a lot to be desired in terms of sharpness/clarity IMO. I cannot believe the 500PF is going to be visibly sharper than the 500E even wide open regardless what the MTF chart suggests. Hit rate was unimpressive too. I知 not suggesting the photog is at fault...looks like the conditions were not ideal, but I have to call it as I see it.
I think I値l wait for Brad Hill痴 assessment.
I think if ultimate sharpness is the key criteria one is seeking, then the 500mm PF may not be the optimal lens. I owned (not past tense) the 300mmPF and recently sold it. I sold it for two reasons... needed some funds to afford my pre-ordered 500mm PF and I had two lenses that already cover the 300mm range.
With the exception of a trip to BC in 2017, my 300mmPF was an orphaned optic. Since I decided to keep my 200-400, it made sense to sell the 300PF and replace it with a 500mmPF that will get a lot more use.
Now to the sharpness point, my 300mmPF was not as sharp at 300mm with my 200-400mm lens. In fact, it was about as sharp as my wife's 200-500VR at 300mm.
I expect that the 500mmPF will be brilliant in good light, but it will be less than great in low to moderate light. However, it is small and can be carried in the same bag with my much heavier 200-400VR. Here portability and the capacity to get to 500mm without a teleconverter (750mm on my D500) is more important to me than ultimate sharpness.
Then again, if you consider what I own in the way of lenses,*... I'm not an ultimate sharpness type of guy... I'm more of a... get the shot type of guy and work with what I've got in post.
As they say... different strokes for different folks.
bruce
* should you care about what we (Tamy and I) carry, here is a list... not one is in the list of Nikon's sharpest/greatest lenses.
Tamy: 20mm f/1.8, 24-120mmf/4VR, 200-500mmVR
Bruce: 16-35VR, 70-200VRf/4, 200-400VRi, ancient 105f/4 AiMicro... soon to arrive (?) 500PF
Sep 09, 2018 at 10:06 AM
Previous versions of OwlsEyes's message #14590142 « "Official" Nikon 500 f/5.6E PF Discussion and Image Thread »
