Jump to content

Nikon 500mm/f5.6 PF Super Tele Formally Announced


ShunCheung

Recommended Posts

It is the same when I compare the hood that comes with the 300 PF to that of the 300/2.8. That PF hood is roughly about half the length of the 2.8 lens hoods.

 

I understand why Nikon has made the hoods shorter on the PF lenses, maneuverability and price. However, just like several super teles come with two tripod feet (a normal and a short one for monopods), it would have been nice for the PF lenses to come with full length lens hoods as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I agree, but it's the f4 over-priced hoods rather than the 'cheap' 5.6 PF's!

 

I kinda assumed most hoods were as long as possible, ie just short of vignetting in the same way petal hoods are sculptured to offer the maximum shade with no vignetting.

 

If they knew PF lenses are not very flare resistant, an extra 50mm or so on hood length isn't going to break the bank!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most people would put the hood on backward for storage. Since the 500mm/f5.6 PF is a much shorter lens by design, a long lens hood wouldn't fit backward due to the tripod collar. The old 600mm/f4 and 400mm/f2.8 have the tripod collar towards the front side of the lens due to the heavy front element, Nikon had to use a two-section lens hood for them to fit backward. The new FL version of the 600mm/f4 and 400mm/f2.8 don't have that issue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Illka, while I agree with you in part, the HB-48 hood that Nikon Supplied with the 70-200/2.8 VRII begs to differ. Same goes for the HB-23 that comes with the 16-36/4VR and the DX 12-24 and 10-24 (and probably other lenses too). (I use the HB-29 hood from the first version of the 70-200/2.8 on my VRII because the HB-29 is longer and allows me to put the camera down on the lens - which I know you should no, but I often do.)

 

Shun, there are several inches between the reversed hood and the tripod foot on the 500 PF. Same holds true for the 300PF with a mounted tripod collar, there is lots of room for a longer lens hood.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are some of the test photos I took with the 500/5.6 PF and the D850. The last two are with the TC-14EIII.

 

Please note

All are taken for my personal evaluation of the lens, they have no artistic merits. I wanted to test for ghosting but also to get a sense for what it could deliver when ghosting is not an issue. Except for the one I recovered in post, no settings were adjusted in post. I only cropped the handle of the Vespa, all other photos show the entire FX image area. Photos without the TC are taken at F5.6 and the two with the 1.4 TC are taken at F8.

 

Below is with the sun to the right, outside the frame:

18496089-orig.jpg

Below is with the sun outside the top left corner the left taken with the sun at the same distance from the edge of the frame as the previous photo:

18496092-orig.jpg

Below is with the sun just above the image:

18496090-orig.jpg

This is what I could rescue in post:

18496091-orig.jpg

 

Having that horrible ghosting out of the way, I want to show what I liked about the lens. Here is a photo taken with the TC-14EIII at F8 (700 mm, handheld):

18496087-orig.jpg

And here it is at 100 %:18496088-orig.jpg

 

Below is a candid photo taken with TC-14EIII, also at F8 (700 mm handheld):

18496094-orig.jpg

 

To conclude:

I am confident the 500/5.6 PF will produce excellent results, as long as you can control the ghosting.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lens arrived this afternoon. I put it on my D 810 and took some test shots of passion flowers in my backyard with bumble bees flying around in search of pollen. Lighting was mostly strong sunlight. I used a tripod with a ball head but the camera and lens were never fully locked in. The ballhead was set loose so I could compose as needed.

 

Camera was set to Continuous High. AF was set to AF-C "S" for shots 1 and 2 and Dynamic D 9 for shots 3 and 4. The tracking shot of the bumble bee was greatly helped in that the bee was mostly in hover state waiting his turn to land on the passion flower. EV was at a minus.7 on all shots as best as i can recall. Matrix metering and A mode with the aperture set at 5.6--wide open for all shots. .

 

No processing was done to any of the images and all are full frames with no cropping. All I did was to create jpegs from the RAWs at 950 pixels along the longest side.

 

Based on this test run, this lens will get a lot of use. 1009925745_1_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_D810_21.jpg.289507bb35260eccd559cdf1d42c6a14.jpg 692993182_2_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_D810_49.jpg.d5f4c2b62f58329ab6f2b86ff23acc9e.jpg 1246832733_3_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_D810_227.jpg.0b90d18f6b4c9eee7a7ed57de5551c67.jpg 789441118_4_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_D810_244.jpg.7735d6baf933762a5bb91d845296e4b7.jpg

Edited by joseph_smith|3
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

lens arrived this afternoon. I put it on my D 810 and took some test shots of passion flowers in my backyard with bumble bees flying around in search of pollen. Lighting was mostly strong sunlight.

Thanks Joseph. Congrats on the new lens.

 

Since you also have the 500mm/f4 E FL AF-S VR, it would be a good comparison between the two lenses. Once again my main concern is AF speed on the f5.6 PF lens, especially when the light is dimmer.

 

Just curious, did you order from one of the major mail-order stores? It looks like a number of people, especially in Europe, have taken delivery already.

 

One thing I am a bit concerned about is that the 500mm/f5.6 PF is made in China. In the US, it may be subjected to additional tariff soon. That could potentially add a couple hundred dollars to the price tag.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Joseph. You mentioned you used a tripod with the ballhead at movable condition. Was VR on or off? It is perplexing that the two Dynamic D 9 shots @1/2000s are not any sharper than the first two AFC-S shots set at 1/100s and 1/200s respectively. All shots focused on the bee except for #3, I wonder what hand-holding with VR would yield?

 

Need to find out more about how this lens behaves. Thanks again Joseph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Mary, in all four shots VR was off.

 

In image 4, the reason for the lack of sharpness was that the focus point was not placed on the bee flying away as it still was pointing at a portion of the passion flower. In taking these kind of images, to get sharp images, placement of the focus point is super critical, then a fast enough shutter speed and the right amount of depth of field. When you have competing elements for the focus point to grab onto, you sometimes have to tweak the focus manually (if you have the time to do it.).

 

In my experiments with VR on Nikon long lenses when mounted on a tripod or gimbal head, I usually turn off VR in that I do not see the benefits often mentioned in articles about VR. Perhaps that is because my shooting techniques are not as good as they should be. When I use a monopod, I turn VR on.

 

I just finished some tests of this 500mm f5.6 lens on my D 500. I will post these later. This combination is even more remarkable. But getting that focus point in the right place is still the key to sharp images.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here are four images taken with my D 500 and my 500mm f5.6 Nikon PF lens. Camera and lens were mounted to a tripod and ballhead but with them loose on the head. Aperture set to f 5.6 for images 1 and 2, then f 6.3 for image 3 and 4. . VR Off, AF-C dynamic 25. Matrix metering. Aperture priority mode. ISO 800. Time of day, late afternoon. 1505502846_1_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_2_D500_31.jpg.f5e31448550d34c30b743fb3ad96ab0d.jpg 1532624456_2_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_2_D500_37.jpg.449c3e49f587cbe1a08016b7a3456359.jpg 1730948960_3_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_2_D500_158.jpg.a099970d0b4df7c782941eedd402d1a0.jpg 2069309122_4_180919_Lens500mmf5.6_2_D500_54.jpg.e881a06cc18a307e2c02f8b693651dce.jpg
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shun, on my D 810 acquiring AF was pretty good even when the flower was in shadow. On my D 500, AF acquisition was even better. I will try and do a comparison with my 500mm f4 E VR this weekend if not sooner.

 

 

Here are some cell phone pictures comparing the size of the Nikon 300mm f4 PF and the Nikon 500mm f55.6 PF. The 500mm is mounted on a D 810 and the 300mm on a D 500.

 

Joe161384628_300mmand500mmpflenses.jpg.420084d16f7d7c4560470be88af40aa2.jpg 867026867_300mmand500mmpflensesoncamera.jpg.2abaf11a21c42ea7c555e92741fbb541.jpg 1616453460_300mmand500mmpflenses2.jpg.3bb8b9591dc5aad360c1178529acd8cb.jpg

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...