OwlsEyes
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Re: The 500PF is unique among all Nikon superteles. | |
The "elephant in the room"...
I received the 500PF in October, 2018... probably among the first in my state. It was a photography changing lens to me. Unlike my prior longer lenses, I was not tethered to a tripod and could maneuver the lens between branches like never before. When paired with the D500 I had effective field of view that matched 750mm. This was the first time I could shoot smaller species with fidelity. When attached to a D500 or D850, AF performance was at least as good as my 200-400mm lens.
In 2018 I also purchased my first Z6. Like the 500PF it was a "game changing" experience. Clearly not due to its AF speed, but due to the ever-present histogram and af accuracy. So for years I put the 500PF on the D500 and the 200-400 on the Z6... Enter the Z9.
I broke down in April 2022 and purchased the Z9. The body replaced my D500 and the 500PF was paired to that. The 500PF did not lose its luster, in fact it became better. It was sharper, faster, and perfect... until.
Until I realized that the lens was noisy and the VR would hum away. Funny how something you could care less about with one camera suddenly became important. As this continued to bug me in blinds, sneaking up on subjects, and during video recordings... Nikon released the elephant in the room... the 400 f4.5.
Quite frankly, if I were a mirrorless shooter looking for a long lens, I'd pass on the 500PF. I would't pass because of its optical quality, because of its size, or because of its aperture... it's the other stuff. On the other hand, if. were shooting a D850 and a Z8/Z9/Z7II etc... I'd buy a 400 f4.5 w/ 1.4 and 2x converter. You get a lighter lens, a quiet lens, a faster aperture, faster AF lock, and full integration with the Z system.
What about the 500PF vs 180-600?... this one is a harder one for me to answer. Making a choice here requires a cost-benefit analysis where you assess your priorities. The 180-600 is very strong at 500mm but not as good as the 500PF. The 500PF is sharper, lighter, and faster aperture. The 180-600 is a zoom, goes to 600 w/out a converter, and has full Z-mount benefits light super-quiet AF and no need for an FTZ. On the other hand it is not a feather weight.
Me... I don't have my 500PF any longer. It was a great lens for me and I made many photos that would never had been made without it, but I've embraced mirrorless... full stop. I've since moved on from the 400 f4.5 and now use a 400 f2.8S + 180-600... the gear is heavier, but I still have a "light kit" (the zoom) and "set kit" (400 f2.8S). If I had to start from scratch with a limited budget today, I'd ask myself this question.. 400 f4.5 or 600 f6.3PF?... not 500PF. On the other hand, if my budget was truly limited... under $4000 (which really is still a ton of money for a hobby).. I'd probably look for a D500 and 500PF... or Zf and 180-600... probably choosing the latter in order to maintain a step into the present.
cheers,
bruce
|
