Jump to content

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


ShunCheung

Recommended Posts

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.

Yes I saw that, I mistakenly typed in #3 as the image number. None of those bees were reasonably sharp, even @1/2000. However, the new set you shot with the D500 seems sharper, with the last image @1/200 and the first 3 @320. These are all moving objects, so a number of variables are involved toward creating the final image. I wonder if you would compare this lens with others on a stationery object - such as Shun's brick wall? Oh well, perhaps we should leave this task to Shun. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jo, do you happen to have access to a 200-500mm ?

 

I'm wondering if you can see what the effective focal length is at 500mm for close up stuff, like bees, ie how much the 200-500mm 'breathes', compared to your 500mm PF.

 

It's looking very promising as a bug chaser...:-)

 

How close are you to closest focus in the bee shots? I know it's a bit further than the 200-500m on paper, but magnification at that distance is unknown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, for some of the shots I was as close as you could get or at the minimum focus distance. That statement applies to the image 3 and 4 taken with the D 500 and image 1 taken with the D 810. For those images the shooting distance was about 10 ft. For the others maybe another 2 ft or 12 feet.

 

I am going to take some pictures with the lens on my D 500 and D 810 with am electronic extension tube to see how it works for macro work (and if AF is still functioning.)

 

I do agree that this lens will have lots of uses for shooting butterflies, dragon flies, and other such critters. I also want to see if there is any vignetting when an electronic extension tube is used on a full frame camera. I doubt if there will be any such problems on a DX body like the D 500.

 

To improve accurate focus, I am going to test other Dynamic settings on my D 500 like Group Area AF to see if that helps with bumble bee/close up shots.

 

If you are going to use this lens on a tripod I suggest you consider getting a replacement collar and foot when they become available. The one that comes on the lens seems too "thin" and not robust enough to hold up well with frequent use. I am going to get a replacement lens cap to use instead of the plastic one supplied with the lens. I like the neoprene hood type lens caps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe, speaking of the tripod collar, based on my discussion with Nikon, I thought it was like the one on the 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR, i.e. only the foot part is removable. If the entire collar is removable, I would make sure it is secure, as some of you know my 200-500 fell out of its collar and is damaged.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shun, you are right about the collar not being able to be replaced. I had not noticed that. On the foot, there is a a push button so I could see how the foot could become unattached from the collar. I added a Wimberley lens plate (P-10, about 3.3 inch long) to my foot so the lens can fit Arca Swiss heads. The foot takes two screws. The foot is about 2.5 inches long.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"The foot is about 2.5 inches long"

 

Oh, the oddities of the Imperial measuring system!!

 

You shouldn't get any vignetting with an extension tube, but I guess you might need quite a lot to get any meaningful effect.

 

IIRC, it's a proportion thing, so a 50mm tube would be 10% of 500mm and get you, I'm guessing here (!) 10% closer?? Hopefully someone will correct this if it's wrong:confused:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shun, you are right about the collar not being able to be replaced. I had not noticed that. On the foot, there is a a push button so I could see how the foot could become unattached from the collar. I added a Wimberley lens plate (P-10, about 3.3 inch long) to my foot so the lens can fit Arca Swiss heads. The foot takes two screws. The foot is about 2.5 inches long.

Thanks again Joe. Probably should get a replacement foot with A/S style QR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the dragonflies are more 'friendly' where you are, the chances of getting near one with anything shorter than 300mm is pretty unlikely here in the UK, unless it's early morning and they're cold.. The longest dedicated macro I know of is the Nikon 200mm f4. Maybe it's time Nikon refreshed it?

 

With the 200-500mm I found it's 'happy spot' regarding DoF and sharpness to be around f9 and 420mm when at min focus.

 

------------------------

 

I've just had the 'instock' from Amazon UK at £3737, or Amazon Germany at 4146 Euros

 

or $3600...:(

 

With the £:$ at 1:1.25 it 'should be' £2900 and I dare say the Euro: $ should be equally better!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think we should assume that 70-200/2.8 replacement feet fit the 500 PF. Some 500 PF users report that their third party foot designed for Nikon 70-200 is loose fit and doesn't lock firmly whereas others report their 70-200 foot fits the lens ok. It seems likely that dimensions and tolerances are slightly different which can lead to this kind of a problem. I think it's best to either use a QR plate on the Nikon foot or wait for a new A-S compatible foot designed specificallt for the 500 PF from one of the companies who make such things. Edited by ilkka_nissila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unless the dragonflies are more 'friendly' where you are, the chances of getting near one with anything shorter than 300mm is pretty unlikely here in the UK, unless it's early morning and they're cold.. The longest dedicated macro I know of is the Nikon 200mm f4. Maybe it's time Nikon refreshed it?

Yes, it can be quite tricky as they are "scaredy cats". They usually hover around ponds, especially the damselfly - perhaps this aspect is similar in the UK? Fortunately it's a relatively large insect and the 200mm macro and some lenses can work well with it. Behaviorwise they usually come back to the same perch; so this makes it easy to plan a pleasing composition. The 500mm PF can do it but its 9.8' minimum focus distance would not make it my choice for this activity.

 

Catching dragonfly is not my special passion; I shoot it when I happen to see it; however, I had the good fortunate to have caught it with both macro and long zoom lenses in the past. Here is one with the 200-400mm (minimum focus distance = 6.4').

Dragonfly.jpg.679dd04090be12b5d04cb821727312e5.jpg

Nikon D300 with 200-400mm lens +1.4x @ 550mm (825mm in 35mm). 1/1000s f/8 ISO 800

Edited by Mary Doo
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yup, 800mm + is about right for the nervy little critters.;)

That's the advantage of using a DX camera + 1.4x. ;) In truth I did not intend to shoot dragonflies with this heavy telezoom. I happened to be looking for birds with with this lens mounted on the tripod and this dragonfly was at a good spot - see the blurred swaying vegetation at the back that made a pleasing backdrop. With the 500 5.6 lens at a minimum of 10 ft's focus distance, the image would include undesirable distractions. You would need the 1.4x to bring the insect closer and make a better background.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I almost had a disaster with my 500mm f5.6. I picked it up by the lens foot and the lens fell off! Fortunately it fell on my bed and not the floor and was not damaged. My finger must have touched that button on the foot that holds it on the lens. Hopefully a replacement foot will solve this problem from happening again. Are there any tips on how to prevent the foot from disengaging besides not touching that button ?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hopefully a replacement foot will solve this problem from happening again. Are there any tips on how to prevent the foot from disengaging besides not touching that button ?

Many years ago, when I was holding my 70-200mm by an RRS replacement foot, it fell off to the ground. Fortunately it was a board walk, the metal hood was hit and no fatal damage was done - though the filter thread became very tight since. How to prevent it? I never held it just by its foot any more. The replacement foot designs have most likely improved now.

Edited by Mary Doo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many years ago, when I was holding my 70-200mm by an RRS replacement foot, it fell off to the ground. Fortunately it was a board walk, the metal hood was hit and no fatal damage was done - though the filter thread became very tight since. How to prevent it? I never held it just by its foot any more. The replacement foot designs have most likely improved now.

As a lot of you know, I was holding my 200-500 by its tripod collar foot, and the entire lens barrel fell out off the collar, hitting the floor at home from about 3 feet, resulting in a $285 repair bill. After almost a month of parts hold, that lens is finally on its way back to me. In time for me to make an A/B comparison between the 200-500 and 500mmf/5.6 PF, whenever Nikon sends me a test sample.

  • Like 1
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...