Nikon 500mm P manual focus lens

[stephen_lilley]

I find myself shooting mainly birds, with a Nikon 300mm F4 AFS and Nikon 1.4 TC. Like every other bird

photographer before me I realise that along with improving my field technique, to enable me get nearer to my targets,

a lens with more reach is highly desirable. My budget will not extend to one of the AFS super tele's I have therefore,

after reading many, many posts on the forum, decided that I have three options.

1 Nikon 300mm F2.8 VR /1.7TC.

2 Sigma 500mm F4.5.

3 Nikon 500mm P manual focus.

I think I will be opting for the Nikon 500 P Lens.

I would like to ask, is the viewfinder on my D200 good enough, especially when using TC's,to enable me to focus

manually? My eyesight is okay, but I,m no spring chicken. Would the use of a "Katz Eye " be advisable? and finally

is the viewfinder on the D300 much better than the D200? I do not have a problem when occasionally I manually

focus with my 300mm F4 AFS.

 

Regards Stephen

[bruce_margolis]

Stephen, it might just be my technique but I have mixed results using manual focus for flying birds. Put another way, my AF results are much better. The Nikon 500P sounded neat to me, too, but in the end I just couldn't do it. I dunno, maybe my eyes are just getting weaker as I age. :-)

 

If you are fine with manual focus, go for it but if you can afford the Nikon 300mm f/2.8, that would be my first choice. I use the Sigma version with a 1.4 t/c and the results are mighty good. I don't know about the 1.7 t/c. Others might have a thought on which yields better results..... a photo with the 1.7 or one that is cropped from a shot with the 1.4.

[ShunCheung]

I had the 500mm/f4 P until about 10 years ago. Back then, I had no problem manually focusing it on an F4 and F5 even with a TC-14b, but of course I was 10 years younger. :-)

 

The 500mm/f4 P is excellent as long as you are not shooting a moving target.

 

The viewfinders on the D200 and D300 are similar in quality, but the one on the D300 covers 100% of the frame.

[simon_baker2]

Stephen,

 

I have owned the 500mm F4 "P" and it is an excellent MF super tele, However - personally I often failed to capture images of birds that

I would consider to be in sharp focus ( used a D200 at the time ), now this was not a fault of the lens but more my inability to focus the

lens quick enough. In January i purchased a D3 and a 400mm F2.8 AFS 2 ( not the VR version ) and what a difference it has made to

my success rate !

 

The mention of Sigma lenses will often give mixed responses ( batch variations etc ) and the build on the EX lenses while being very

good is not to the same level as the Pro Nikkors. However, personally if my choice was limited between either a 500mm F4 P and a

Sigma 500mm F4.5 EX then i would choose the Sigma as the HSM autofocus would clinch it for me and the results from the Sigma are

very good to be fair.......i would prefer an "in focus" image from the Sigma to the hit & miss results I obtained from the MF Nikkor.

 

Now that said, you have mentioned the Nikkor 300mm F2.8 VR in your question which suggests to me that it is within your budget, if it

really is and you cannot afford the longer AFS Nikkors then ( again only my personal preference ) to me its a "no-brainer" get the 300mm

F2.8 VR and team it up with the AFS 2E converters , the lens will autofocus with all three converters and the VR will work too , and

while many will say image quality suffers the drop is not that great but the flexibility you gain is nice. With a 1.4E2 the lens will become

a 420mm F4, with the 1.7E2 it will become a 510mm F4.8, and with a 2E2 it becomes a 600mm F5.6 all combo's with autofocus and

VR.

 

I often use my 400mm with those 3 converters and am more than happy with the results.

 

So my advice is.... if you can afford the 300mm VR + converter/s then that is the best choice otherwise buy a nice sample of the

Sigma ( you will lose AF though if you use any converter with it ) as I found MF and bird photography coupled with a Dx sensor is not

ideal, of course others may disagree .

 

I hope this is of help to you, good luck with whichever way you go and let us all know which option you decide upon.

 

Simon

[rgeorge911]

I use the 500 P lens with my D200, and find it very nice.

 

Yes, it's hard to focus on moving birds, but it's possible.

 

Reed<div></div>

[joseph_smith3]

Stephen, I can attest that there is no problem with manually focusing the Nikon 500mm f 4.0 P lens with the D 200 or D 300 with or without the the Nikon TC 14B or the Nikon TC 301 tcs. I have done it many many times. (I can also attest that with the D 70's viewfinder you are wasting your time, not because of the lens but because of the viewfinder on that camera.) The only issue is your eyes. I am 65 and wear tri-focals. While I do not have the Katz Eye prizm that would probably be a plus in the D 200. I am going to be selling my 500mm P lens in that I now have the AFS version. If you have an interest send me an email. If you do macro work mf on a D 200 you should have no issues with long lens work mf with that 500mm f 4.0 P lens. Joe Smith

[bruce_margolis]

"otherwise buy a nice sample of the Sigma ( you will lose AF though if you use any converter with it )"

 

Simon, just a correction...... I use the Sigma HSM 300mm f/2.8 with the 1.4 t/c and it autofocuses perfectly. In fact, it matches the speed of my AF-S lenses.

 

But perhaps I misunderstood. If you were talking only about the Sigma 500mm, then I understand your point and I apologize.

[douglas_greenberg]

I use the 500mm. f4P, and even the 600mm. f5.6, which is even dimmer, and I have no real problems focusing accurately, except in very low light. You can use the focus confirmation in the viewfinder, after all, and the trick is to take multiple exposures and pick out the best ones. What's wrong with "hit and miss" if you can just hit "delete" for the "misses?"

 

Focusing manually is more difficult than just "pointing and shooting" in this regard, but it's not rocket science and people did it unthinkingly for years and years and years. I have sympathy, of course for someone with diminishing eyesight. AF is a big help! But I'm getting up there in years myself (57) and don't have perfect vision, and I manage to do ok with MF superteles. As I turn that focusing ring I comfort myself my thinking about all the money I'm saving :)).

 

People have asked about the Katz eye prism previously and it seems that once the maximum aperture reaches even f4 the central spot gets tricky to use. If it were me I'd try to work with the viewfinder that comes with the camera.

 

And you know, you can even get photos of moving animals this way. You learn tricks, including pre-focusing and shooting continuously while you focus. Etc. It can be done.

[elmroc]

I too shoot birds, and sports. As an option, you can look at the Nikon AF-I series lenses.

 

They are fairly fast focusing, have the internal focus motors, so they will work on the D40/D60 also.

They are less expensive than the now current AF-S lenses.

Only drawback i have seen with them, is that Nikon does not do all repairs on them anymore. They have limited supply on parts should they need repair.

 

I have 2 AF-I lenses. The 300 f2/8, and the 500 f4. I 'm very happy with the focusing speed of both.

 

Good luck

[peter_koralis]

The Sigma is a good lens and offers AF. The MF 500 is a great lens but of course will require harder work, the

results though are excellent considering that you can pick one up for a couple grand.

 

Heres an interesting and good review

 

http://nikonglass.blogspot.com/2008/05/nikkor-mf-500mm-f4p.html

 

and some nice bird picks with that lens

 

http://hellenicwildlife.blogspot.com/

 

PK