vladimir_pushkin

<p>Hi,<br>

newest AF adjustment takes into account the distance and the focal length?</p>

<p>Thanks to David for the good question. I, too, 200-400\4vr and D300. 200-400 has a big problem with the accuracy of AF. Adjusting the number of AF depends on the distance and the focal length at the same time. I created a table with a focal length, the distance to the target and the setting of AF tune. Now my brain melted.<br />I am very much encouraged by the latest configuration АF tune D500. Friends, if I can finally adjust the autofocus, taking into account the distance to the object? I know that Sigma attempted. Can I hope that Nikon will allow me to set up 200-400 and I will not continue to shed tears?<br /> I apologize for my English.</p>

<p>Andy, thanks for the reply. Your mention of Aqua tech very unexpected. You wrote that?<br>

http://www.aquatech.net/Soft-Hood-ASHM.php</p>

<p><br />Obviously, the native short hood HK-24 is not available for sale.<br />Nikon indicates that NK-24 is compatible with both versions of the AF-S I and AF-S II.<br>

http://www.nikon.com.sg/en_SG/product_details.page?DCRPath=templatedata/en_SG/saleable_product_information/data/Accessories/Nikkor%20Lenses/Lens%20Hoods/Slip-on%20Lens%20Hood%20HK-24.xml&CategoryID=gp54h9th&currentTab=&currentLink=gp54h9v2<br>

<br>

It is absolutely all sellers indicate that NK-28 is only compatible with AF-S II.<br />Friends, Is it possible to NC-28 for AF-S I?<br />I'm looking for a used 500mm AF-S I without hood.</p>

<p><br />After the first post I found the statement that with 500 \ 4 VR does not always OK. Verbatim from forum.dpreview.com<br /> <em><strong>Jens Morin</strong> wrote: All this said I have to say that I wish I didn't sell the 500 4.0 </em><br /><em>AFS. My new 500 VR is less crisp and sharp as well as heavier than </em><br /><em>the "old" one and I have yet to find a shot that have benefitted from </em><br /><em>VR. Spoiled shots due to VR are common. I am still hoping that I got </em><br /><em>a lemon and will try to test another copy</em>.<br /> In addition, since MTF for AF-S 200-400/4 for both versions are identical(nano and no-nano) I have not found MTF for the old 500\4. <br /><br /> Two words about the technique of shooting. Left hand I hold the lens on top, and a face sticks to the body and shoot a high series and everything is OK. I stand Manfrotto 055 non carbon. For me, VR does not provide any benefit.</p>

<p>Sorry for my English.<br>

Friends, thank you for your answers and participation. Apparently, to seek VR version no sense to me, because I shoot only from the shelter with a tripod.<br>

The surprise for me was the assertion of John Crowe, that the AF-II better autofocus performance. John, I ask you to indicate the source if possible.</p>

 

After buying 500 \ 4 I have to sell 200-400 \ 4 and lose the flexibility that is characteristic of zoom. However, the purchase FF body and TC will allow me to have three angle.<br /> <br />

 

 

<p><br /> <br /></p>

<p>People, I think I matured to buy 500 \ 4. My budget is $ 5500, only for the outstanding result could pay $ 6500-7000. I look to the VR version with Nano(second hand). What is it in comparison with the AF-S II or I. Does it make sense to strive for Nano?<br>

Reduction in weight and VR for me does not matter, but only IQ. Serves as the I and II version of the modern supersmall pixel?</p>

<p>Advise, where a comparison of the IQ of the lenses.<br /> I'm going to replace the 200-400 VRI to VRII or 500 \ 4 non VR.<br /> It looked— the digitalpicture.com<br>

is there any other examples of excellence VRII vs VRI?</p>

<p>Unfortunately, no answer came. However, my last question is offtopic.</p><div></div>

<p>Unfortunately, no answer came. However, my last question is offtopic.</p>

<p>Thanks for the reply! Do you have survived tests for IQ?<br />Will I get a substantial advantage over the 200-400 \ 4 mkI?<br>

Friends, do you head-on compare 200-400 \ 4 vs. 500 \ 4?</p>

<p>People, what about the Nikkor 500 \ 4 AF-S MKI vs MKII?<br />Primarily interested in the optical difference. Some may compare two versions nonVR? The difference in price including customs is $ 1,000, for me it is essential.</p>

<p>I wrote to them ... They sent a form letter. Craig, thanks for your opinion.</p>

<p>Craig, Thank you for specific and detailed response. I noticed that nobody has written that he had problems with repairs. This is a plus. Friends, what do you say if I write to Nikon and ask about the accident repair AF-I?</p>

<p>Colleagues, indicate where there are objective tests of this lens. I used Google for 10 days and I had zero results.</p>

<p>Thank you, I am constantly looking at the thread, very big for me to buy.</p>

<p>Thank you, I have one positive vote, but 500 / 4 Nikon made a 800 pieces</p>

<p>Dear colleages,<br />I hope in the forum I will meet user at tele lenses with AF-I. How often did you have problems with it? Did you have repair it? I,d like to buy AF-I Nikkor 500/4. Thanks.</p>