500mm f4 ED

[joemikel1]

<p>So I'm thinking of buying this lens. I've read about it and the most expensive AF-S, AF-S II and AF-S VR. I know I will have to learn the technique to manual focus it, and it will be almost impossible to successfully handhold it, or get birds in flight....<br />The AF versions are still expensive to me, and I don't want to get a third party, so...<br />What kind of photographs will I have to give up?. Is it a mistake to buy this lens? Should I better save for the real thing (I mean the AF-S VR version)? <br />Any comment , experience or thought welcomed<br />PD: Forgot to say I use a Nikon D300</p>

[Rene11664880918]

<p>I also want a 500 so badly but I really need AF-S and VR. I think a manual 500 or the old AF type would be frustrating. That is because of my inexperience. I know the lenses are great and many years ago everybody took really nice pictures with those lenses. So there is nothing wrong with them It all the depends on the user.</p>

[elliot1]

<p>A monopod will do wonders for a lens of this focal length on a lens without VR (probably would be helpful and welcome even with VR due to its weight).</p>

[r_johnston]

<p>Id only get the VR. At 79, it was getting difficult to hold even a 200mm, bought the 300mm VR and love it. Have been able to hand hold it at ISO200, but have some good shots of humming birds using a Carbon Vibre Monopod. I use the monopod like the third leg of a tripod, with my two legs being the other two. Kicking it way out in front of me, I can brace/lean myself against the monopod and hold it rock steady that way.</p>

[hughes]

<p>Jose<br>

I have this lens and I don't think for a minute it is a mistake to buy. It offers fantastic value, in fact KEH have one for $1599 in bargain condition compare to about $8500 for a new AFS version. <br>

Firstly the lens is pretty much unusable without a monopod, it is way too hard to hold and focus at the same time. As far as being a manual focus , with a little practise this is a surprisingly easy lens to use it kind of snaps in and out of focus, it is very sharp if you nail it. But of course it is very heavy and hard to use in high wind etc etc, if you take your time and use good technique you can get images equal to the newer AFS it just won't be as easy .<br>

Steve</p>

[carl_becker2]

<p>I found one last year and have been enjoying it ever since with a D700 or D200. I use a Gitzo 1327 tripod and arca swiss B-1 ballhead. I walk through the woods and catch small birds with joy. If you do buy one I doubt you would lose much if you did not like it and sold it.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Once you learn how to manual focus you'll appreciate the $4000-7000 savings. I have been manual focusing for 25 years, so I am used to it. I love my Nikon 400/2.8 AIS and 200/2 AI on my D2X and Kodak SLRn. For much less than the price of one AF-S supertelephoto you can have an entire system from 14mm to 500mm!</p>

[Matthew Brennan]

<p>Jose,</p>

<p>I have just purchased one of these - still en-route to me in Australia from the USA. I had been considering the 500mm f/4 for a few months now and took the plunge this week. </p>

<p>I purchased this as a longer alternative to my 300mm f/4 + TC combos with the D700. I am expecting to primarily shoot small, <strong>stationary</strong> bird life ie. I am not intending this lens for capturing birds on the wing nor am I expecting this lens to cover rapid action sports photography. </p>

<p>My current combination is finding me 3-6 meters short of where I want to be whilst shooting small birds thus I'm forced to often shoot from open, exposed sites which tends to put the birds off perching anywhere within my range. I too, am spoilt with Nikkor AF-S on most of my lenses and will have to learn in time to throw the 500mm f/4 p into focus at will. </p>

<p>Short of resorting to a far from ideal 2x teleconverter with the 300mm f/4 (not in my considerations at all) - I cannot see a realistic 'enthusiast priced' long lens other than the much vaunted 500mm f/4 Ai-P.</p>

[mike w]

<p>Even though my old 300 2.8 Tamron focuses quite well (after an upgrade) even with a 2X attached I still find I manually focus rather a lot, sometimes it just seams quicker or easier than changing the focus point in camera when recomposing on a busy bird. If I found a Nikon 500 F4 at a good price I doubt I would hesitate as long as the metering worked correctly. Now a few more years of my eyes changing the way they focus may change my mind........</p>

<p>Mike</p>

[elmroc]

<p>Jose ,<br />ANother option for you would be a 500mm f4 Af-I</p>

<p>I have one of these, and it's equally as sharp as my 300 2.8 AF-S, It's cost is quite a bit cheaper than an AF-S, and is very fast focusing.<br />THis is the very first of the internal motor focusing lenses. While it is not supported by Nikon any longer, it is repairable thru other means like APS, and other lens repair companies.<br />I think when i bought mine, about 2 years ago, it ran right around $2900.00 with the big heavy hard case.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>I had the 500mm/f4 P lens from 1992 to 1998, before I upgraded to the AF-S version. If your subject is still, manual focusing is not difficult. The real restriction is that it'll be very difficult to photograph anything moving, even slowly walking animals. If you can, by all means get an AF-I or AF-S version. Some of the earlier ones are not as expensive.</p>

<p>This is a tripod lens. If you hand hold or even use a monopod, you are going to waste most of its sharpness.</p>

<p>Since you use a D300, the live view option will greatly help you foucs manually, but again, only if the subject doesn't move.</p>

[joemikel1]

<p>I have been thinking about the kind of pics I like to try, and "static" is not the adjective that comes to me :-)<br /> I love to manual focus, as to hold that ring and see how it comes sharp as I focus gives me some kind of joy, but if you want to get fast action scenes as I intend, really, I'm gonna need that AF-S and VR (and also lots of luck) , so I will have to wait for some months.<br /> Thanks for your wise feedback...</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>As I said, I had the 500mm/f4 P from 1992 to 1998. In 1997 I took that lens to Kenya. In one occasion I was in a Land Rover following several lion cubs. Even though they were walking slowly, I still was not able to manually follow focus on them, and since I was concentrating on keeping them in focus, my composition was off. That experience prompted me to upgrade to the (first) AF-S version in 1998, and I still use that AF-S lens today, some 11 years later.</p>

<p>Even since I got the AF-S version, the camera takes care of focusing and I concentrate on the ever changing composition as the animal moves.</p>

<p>If you want to shoot action, I'd suggest getting an AF-S or perhaps an AF-I version. However, VR is not that necessary and that is partly why I haven't bothered to upgrade yet. I also have the 200-400mm/f4 AF-S VR where I switch off VR over 99% of the time.</p>

[arthuryeo]

<p>Like everything else, people buy a Porsche or a BMW M3 not because they are able to make use of the strengths of these road marvels on a daily basis but whenever the opportunities present themselves, the capabilites are present for them to use. VR is one of such features</p>

<p>Standard VR is useful when you are in a situation where tripod or monopod are simply too unwieldly to handle/manage, let alone a Wimberly. Additionally, if your application requires you to move from one location to another fast, I see standard VR useful handholding the lens.</p>

<p>Tripod VR mode can be useful if you do not want to press on the lens with your left hand all the time to reduce vibrations of the mirror-flap when releasing the shutter.</p>

<p> </p>

[john_stuedle]

<p>

Depending on your camera, you can hand-hold this lens. With higher ISO's and good technique it's well within the realm of possibilities. Now manually focusing AND panning hand held is another story. I use both a 400 f/3.5 and a 500 f/8 mirror hand held with a D3. Wide open to isolate your subject, the 500 f/4 will be very finicky to focus but it's possible on more stationary subjects.

</p>