robert_n_moz

Hi everybody,

I'm back into shopping for a pro-level telephoto and would love to experiment the newest Phase Fresnel technology. However, I heard about possible metering issues – or incompatibilities – with my good old D700.

Thanks for your input... ; - )

<p>Hi there:<br>

I tried to fine-tune a recently acquired used AF 180mm/2.8 (non-D) lens on my D700, with no improvement: image remains sharp all the way(!)<br>

I formely fine-tuned a 70-200/2.8 (first gen.) on the very same camera with success, leading to a 5-point correction.<br>

Could it be that fine tuning isn't possible with a non-D lens? Or, is my D700 faulty?<br>

Thanks...<br>

Rob</p>

<p>Thanks a lot for your pertinent remarks.<br>

It was indeed easy to make assumptions, and when you assume...(!)</p>

<p>Hi everybody:<br>

This is a purely technical question that arose as my friend and I were discussing autofocus speed.<br>

AF-type lenses rely solely on the integrated motor of the body it is attached to to achieve automatic focus (right?, please correct me if I'm wrong). Since AF-S-type lenses have their own motor, which one of the two motors has precedence? Does one completely concede the AF process to the other, or do they “collaborate”? If the latter, in which way, and if gain there is, to which extent?<br>

Actually, beyond satisfying our own curiosity, it may help him decide on a zoom for shooting indoor sports, as he found its AF-D 80-200mm f/2.8 (two-ring model)-D90 combination a tad slow.<br>

Thanks!...<br>

Rob</p>

<blockquote>

<p>“Today I still own that first-generation 500mm/f4 AF-S...”</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Does Nikon still have parts to repair this lens?<br>

I'm afraid such an upgrade, with its AF motorized design, would reveal quite costly in case of damage, especially since it would be out of warranty...</p>

<p>Thank you very much Shun, I'll definitely investigate the Chicago avenue...<br>

Nikon Canada didn't even ask for the specific parts that were damaged and simply closed the door to any repair possibility.<br>

I'll wait for the insurance proposition and, who knows, maybe I'll consider upgrading to an autofocus model. I find the build quality of the first AFS version very reassuring.<br>

I sometimes shoot with a friend fully equipped with the latest versions of Nikon lenses and bodies, and we both find the 500-P optically outstanding.</p>

<p>Thank you everybody.<br>

I wanted to have some background info on this gem in support of my insurance claim after I damaged my own copy.<br>

Nikon (Canada) said they don't have the parts anymore for repair (although, at first, the technical rep mentionned that parts may be rebuilt within a six to eight week delay). And, for the same reason (unable to repair), they don't want to trade it in, even against a newer model.<br>

Not providing parts for a professionnal class lens that was discontinued in 2005 only is in my opinion a shame.<br>

Rob (your loyal Nikonist, devasted and quite disappointed)</p>

<p>I've been using 3M Scotch-Blue Painter's Tape Delicate Surfaces (no. 2080) for years as a first layer. I then add a 5mm thick self-adhesive condensed foam available at my local Home Hardware depot in 7x7-in size. It is a way better shock absorber than LensCoat's. I recently uncoated my 500/4 P that has been protected like this for 3 years and the 3M tape left absolutely no residue. It never peeled away and was yet easy to remove.<br>

And now, with Nathan's No-Mar camo tape as a third layer, my protective kit will look just perfect!<br>

Thanks...<br>

Rob</p>

<p>I just noticed that Adobe Lightroom shows a 700mm focal lengh for the combination above when mounted on a D700 body. I would've expected 500mm (for the actual 510mm). Aperture no. displays properly, though.<br>

So who's the culprit? Anyway I can fix this?<br>

Thanks!...</p>

<p>Thanks a lot everybody for your input. I'm expecting some high res pictures of the lens, so I may revisit the case. And, yes, I will get my hand on this beast before going any further... just to feel the weight!<br>

Rob</p>

<p>I'm in touch with a guy selling a 600/4 (1st AFS version) at around U$4,000. According to him, price is set slightly below average since the front lens has a little chip that “doesn't affect image quality” (blablabla).<br>

Does anyone know if this lens is equipped with a protective glass element (or permanent UV filter)? In such case, I could send it back to Nikon for repair, in the event the chip <em>does </em>affect image quality.<br>

Whether it needs repair or not, is this lens a good deal at this price point?<br>

I'm currently using a 500 Ai-P, and do mostly birds. I'm aware of the weight dilemma, but optically speaking, would you consider the 600 an improvement over the 500? Is the AF-S speed up to the task?<br>

Thank for your kind advice...<br>

Robert</p>

<p>Robert,<br>

I was wondering if you finally found your screw-in filter holder, and if so, where. I'm now in the same situation as you were, looking desperately for this part. Still plenty of gel's available online, and some confusion about part numbers. Do you confirm gel type part no. is 2443 and screw-in 2220?<br>

Thanks...</p>