jorge_o.

<p>Hello<br>

I've been using the 500 f4P for many years, and I love that lens. Now, I upgrade 6 months ago, to the VR version, and...I'm still missing my old 500 f4 P. I expected more from this lens. I thought that 20 years of technology will makes the difference, and in fact, that was true, but not in the way I'll hope. There is something SOFT in this new 500 f4 VR that...I don't like. I'm sorry but it's what I feel, and my budget feels like, too. Just today I've seen a test with a 500 f4 IS (Canon) with 7D vs this 500 f4 VR with a D300s and now I'm really, really worried about.<br>

If there are people with this bad vibration about this lens, please let me knows. I'm a mess with it.</p>

I have the Tiffen lens Fluid (the actual brand name of Kodak lens fluid), and sometimes uses Isopropyl pure (amazing me), and sometimes, I use the traditional "breathing method"...and sometimes, two of them, at once. The multicoating of my 500 f4 P is still there. I think....

In my opinion, no one of these product is the final solution. The Tiffen cleaning solution leaves a lot of smudges in that very big piece of glass, and after using it with one or two Tiffen tissues, I have to use the "old method" to clean the smudges: Breathing on the lens and with the microfiber cloth wipe soft till the lens gets clean. Not easy at all, belive me

I know that the best way to preserve the lenses is avoid cleaning, but in nature photo you have to walk inte places with a lot of dust, or polen, or branches, or water, or bees, or flies, or...and with the blower alone.....

Response to Nikkor 600 5,6 EDIF on DSRL(Category:Nikon Lenses and Optics)

I have a 600 5,6 ED IF recently purchased (July 2007) (after read this opinions, of course) and I think I get an opinion about this lens.

First of all, this is my first "big" lens and I didn't own an arcaswiss or wimberly head over a Gitzo 5, but I think altough this is a 600 lens is not a really enormous lens like de 600 f4 and this gadgets are not neccesary...or maybe yes????

It's a real strange lens. You can get nice results like this with some kind of light and conditions that still can't control.

http://www.pbase.com/image/84261982/original.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/84261983.jpg

But in other cases with distant objects (animals)when the atmosphere effects didn't help (water vapor in summer or windy days with dust in the air...) the lens couldn't deliver sharp images easily. If you want sharp images you have to close up to f11 and the best lighting conditions. Seems like if the sharpness was enough in perfect condition but no more. Maybe it's normal in this kind of lenses and you (the ones who own this, and better kind of lenses) could say something viewing some test images of this summer. These are the middle up average quality of the photos I took. There are better (few) and worse (a lot)

http://www.pbase.com/image/84261984.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/image/84261985.jpg

All the images have a middled sharp mask and adjusted levels

I hope it will be usefull for anyone

Ea,<div></div>