Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED VR Lens !!

Pagman wrote in post #19371128
Stroke of luck catching that fine fella, you did so well under the conditions.

P.

Thank you Pag. It was lucky, indeed.

I removed this thread from my bookmarks after I sold the D500+500PF combo 2 months ago.
I always shot Sony next to Nikon (or Canon before Nikon) for all travel and city photography, and decided to try the A1. I bought it with the intention to let it be the last Sony camera purchase of this decade, and after using it, I am convinced it will be unless it fails at some point before the end of the decade. Everything about the A1 sits right with me, from the body, size, weight, EVF, the fantastic sensor output, responsiveness, svelte carbon fiber mechanical shutter (although granted it is not needed), insane electronic shutter, endless customization options, insane auto focus etc etc. I am unsure whether I would even find a single thing that I don't like about the A1 even if I tried really hard. With a lens like the Zeiss Loxia 25 or the Sony 35GM, it brings a new level of enjoyment to photography that I have not yet experienced with mirrorless ór dslr. So zero regrets about the A1 purchase, it is an utterly enjoyable camera.

Bút..., and I just wanted to illustrate how much I am delighted with the A1 to give context, for birding I am experiencing something similar as when I bought the Canon 7DII+400DOII combo: I am losing my enjoyment in bird photography.
This time it is not the body, far from it, but the 200-600G lens. Initially I was pleasantly surprised with the output, it being a 1900,- consumer zoom lens, but then comes using it in a wide variety of shooting scenarios, and working with the images. I am not saying that the A1+200-600 cannot produce great images, but the lens has no "soul" to me. It lacks bite, transparency, color finesse, microcontrast, overall contrast, it just does not mesmerize like the Nikon 500PF does.

So while I will be shooting the A1 till it stops (or I stop ), I don't see much future for it birding wise with the 200-600G. I now have two options: save on for the 600GM, but apart from expensive, that lens is big and 3kg, and I don't like big lenses. Or return to Nikon for the 800PF that was announced and knocked my socks off with its price point. For me no Z9, it is again too big and heavy, but I still see possibilities with the Z50 (as a D500 like return sensor wise) or the Z6II. Eventually, a gripless Z9 incarnation will be the way to go.The 800PF may be long, but it doesn't have the huge diameter of the Sony 600GM front lens and hood, and it does not need a TC, so it is almost 1 kg lighter than the 600GM+1.4TC.

Anyway, just thought I could share this here, safely away from the heated forum debates, where I would probably be flamed for not liking the Sony 200-600G. and I am sure Phil will not be too hard on me for not liking the Z9's size and weight. I put in my pre-order for the Nikon 800PF, and perhaps Phil will show the odd image here now and then taking with this lens. There is already a sizeable waiting list, so I don't expect it before september/october at the earliest.

EyeSpyEagle wrote in post #19371111
I was walking @ lunch today at a park adjacent to a wooded creek. As I was about to head back to the car, I noticed a big beak through an opening in the brush.

It was really pretty dark and the opening was small. I propped myself against a tree & figured I'd see what I could get. I was pleasantly surprised, given the conditions & SS....

Z9, 500PF

1/25... mighty impressive.

Now that you have the 800, 500mm is your "wide angle lens"

Chris1966 wrote in post #19372068
I removed this thread from my bookmarks after I sold the D500+500PF combo 2 months ago.
I always shot Sony next to Nikon (or Canon before Nikon) for all travel and city photography, and decided to try the A1. I bought it with the intention to let it be the last Sony camera purchase of this decade, and after using it, I am convinced it will be unless it fails at some point before the end of the decade. Everything about the A1 sits right with me, from the body, size, weight, EVF, the fantastic sensor output, responsiveness, svelte carbon fiber mechanical shutter (although granted it is not needed), insane electronic shutter, endless customization options, insane auto focus etc etc. I am unsure whether I would even find a single thing that I don't like about the A1 even if I tried really hard. With a lens like the Zeiss Loxia 25 or the Sony 35GM, it brings a new level of enjoyment to photography that I have not yet experienced with mirrorless ór dslr. So zero regrets about the A1 purchase, it is an utterly enjoyable camera.

Bút..., and I just wanted to illustrate how much I am delighted with the A1 to give context, for birding I am experiencing something similar as when I bought the Canon 7DII+400DOII combo: I am losing my enjoyment in bird photography.
This time it is not the body, far from it, but the 200-600G lens. Initially I was pleasantly surprised with the output, it being a 1900,- consumer zoom lens, but then comes using it in a wide variety of shooting scenarios, and working with the images. I am not saying that the A1+200-600 cannot produce great images, but the lens has no "soul" to me. It lacks bite, transparency, color finesse, microcontrast, overall contrast, it just does not mesmerize like the Nikon 500PF does.

So while I will be shooting the A1 till it stops (or I stop ), I don't see much future for it birding wise with the 200-600G. I now have two options: save on for the 600GM, but apart from expensive, that lens is big and 3kg, and I don't like big lenses. Or return to Nikon for the 800PF that was announced and knocked my socks off with its price point. For me no Z9, it is again too big and heavy, but I still see possibilities with the Z50 (as a D500 like return sensor wise) or the Z6II. Eventually, a gripless Z9 incarnation will be the way to go.The 800PF may be long, but it doesn't have the huge diameter of the Sony 600GM front lens and hood, and it does not need a TC, so it is almost 1 kg lighter than the 600GM+1.4TC.

Anyway, just thought I could share this here, safely away from the heated forum debates, where I would probably be flamed for not liking the Sony 200-600G. and I am sure Phil will not be too hard on me for not liking the Z9's size and weight. I put in my pre-order for the Nikon 800PF, and perhaps Phil will show the odd image here now and then taking with this lens. There is already a sizeable waiting list, so I don't expect it before september/october at the earliest.

Glad to hear your impressions of the 200-600, as on paper it seems like the perfect wildlife/birding lens, and would be my #1 consideration if I were to switch to Sony.

First warbler encounter of the year for me here in Wisconsin! Yellow-rump Warblers haven't been a species I've been too successful with in the past, they have just never pose well for me. Maybe that's just the snooty Maryland variety, because these 'butter butts' here in Wisconsin are very friendly (same with the people, much nicer in Wi). These were taken right in my backyard, in the absolute most dreary light. Hope they stick around for a nice day, at least!

MatthewK wrote in post #19372104
1/25... mighty impressive.

Now that you have the 800, 500mm is your "wide angle lens"

Glad to hear your impressions of the 200-600, as on paper it seems like the perfect wildlife/birding lens, and would be my #1 consideration if I were to switch to Sony.

On paper yes, but the visual richness in many ways of the D500+500PF combo is not there i.m.h.o. and I know it is not the camera because that absolutely sings with e.g. the Zeiss Loxia 25mm.
I know it is very personal and I don't like to offend others, but I guessed that it is allright to share my impressions here. The D500+500PF images just worked for me without having to try hard to like them. I just did not have the reach, always (substantially) cropping the D500 shots, and felt the D500 was a dead end for that reason and the only way forward was mirrorless.

Let me say that I really like the Z9 output, but not the package. Now I trust that the 800PF builds on the 500PF, and that it will be easy for me to pick up with the 800PF where I left off with the 500PF, provided it is on a full frame body. I may shortly get the Z50, but then only in anticipation of a Z7III camera with much of the Z9 internals. I don't need a very large battery, nor prolonged 8K video (or any 8K video for that matter). Just some patience now until the 800PF becomes available.

Chris1966 wrote in post #19372131
On paper yes, but the visual richness in many ways of the D500+500PF combo is not there i.m.h.o. and I know it is not the camera because that absolutely sings with e.g. the Zeiss Loxia 25mm.
I know it is very personal and I don't like to offend others, but I guessed that it is allright to share my impressions here. The D500+500PF images just worked for me without having to try hard to like them. I just did not have the reach, always (substantially) cropping the D500 shots, and felt the D500 was a dead end for that reason and the only way forward was mirrorless.

Let me say that I really like the Z9 output, but not the package. Now I trust that the 800PF builds on the 500PF, and that it will be easy for me to pick up with the 800PF where I left off with the 500PF, provided it is on a full frame body. I may shortly get the Z50, but then only in anticipation of a Z7III camera with much of the Z9 internals. I don't need a very large battery, nor prolonged 8K video (or any 8K video for that matter). Just some patience now until the 800PF becomes available.

In my humble opinion, digital has still never equaled film for image quality. I look back at my old medium format Fuju Velvia 6x6 slides and often just shake my head at the three dimensional depth they have. Digital has never equaled that depth.

But I agree with the post above about Sony. I can spot a Sony image a mile away. A couple good friends went to Sony in the past few years and I could immediately tell the difference in IQ. But because they are good friends, I never said anything.

Chris1966 wrote in post #19372068
I removed this thread from my bookmarks after I sold the D500+500PF combo 2 months ago.
I always shot Sony next to Nikon (or Canon before Nikon) for all travel and city photography, and decided to try the A1. I bought it with the intention to let it be the last Sony camera purchase of this decade, and after using it, I am convinced it will be unless it fails at some point before the end of the decade. Everything about the A1 sits right with me, from the body, size, weight, EVF, the fantastic sensor output, responsiveness, svelte carbon fiber mechanical shutter (although granted it is not needed), insane electronic shutter, endless customization options, insane auto focus etc etc. I am unsure whether I would even find a single thing that I don't like about the A1 even if I tried really hard. With a lens like the Zeiss Loxia 25 or the Sony 35GM, it brings a new level of enjoyment to photography that I have not yet experienced with mirrorless ór dslr. So zero regrets about the A1 purchase, it is an utterly enjoyable camera.

Bút..., and I just wanted to illustrate how much I am delighted with the A1 to give context, for birding I am experiencing something similar as when I bought the Canon 7DII+400DOII combo: I am losing my enjoyment in bird photography.
This time it is not the body, far from it, but the 200-600G lens. Initially I was pleasantly surprised with the output, it being a 1900,- consumer zoom lens, but then comes using it in a wide variety of shooting scenarios, and working with the images. I am not saying that the A1+200-600 cannot produce great images, but the lens has no "soul" to me. It lacks bite, transparency, color finesse, microcontrast, overall contrast, it just does not mesmerize like the Nikon 500PF does.

So while I will be shooting the A1 till it stops (or I stop ), I don't see much future for it birding wise with the 200-600G. I now have two options: save on for the 600GM, but apart from expensive, that lens is big and 3kg, and I don't like big lenses. Or return to Nikon for the 800PF that was announced and knocked my socks off with its price point. For me no Z9, it is again too big and heavy, but I still see possibilities with the Z50 (as a D500 like return sensor wise) or the Z6II. Eventually, a gripless Z9 incarnation will be the way to go.The 800PF may be long, but it doesn't have the huge diameter of the Sony 600GM front lens and hood, and it does not need a TC, so it is almost 1 kg lighter than the 600GM+1.4TC.

Anyway, just thought I could share this here, safely away from the heated forum debates, where I would probably be flamed for not liking the Sony 200-600G. and I am sure Phil will not be too hard on me for not liking the Z9's size and weight. I put in my pre-order for the Nikon 800PF, and perhaps Phil will show the odd image here now and then taking with this lens. There is already a sizeable waiting list, so I don't expect it before september/october at the earliest.

Lol... I get it Chris. I have a gut feeling the (comparatively) lower end 200-600 may not resolve sufficiently to feed the high-res A1 sensor. I have seen some really nice images from that lens, but I have also seen at least as many that are more along the lines of what you describe.

I almost hate posting on the other sites (one in particular) due to the combative nature of so many of the folks there. I should have known better than to post the image my buddy took with his new 800PF + 2xTC, less than 24hrs after he got it. It was taken at a distance of approx 50 yards and the egret was surrounded by tall blades of grass so there was no separation between the bird & BG and bokeh flaming comments ensued. It was a mistake on my part. When he sent it to me, it looked pretty nice on my phone. I asked if he would mind if I shared it, so he sent me a jpg that when enlarged didn;t look as good but I ran with it anyway. LESSON LEARNED! lol!

Regarding size & weight... I had been moving in a smaller / lighter direction too, but I just couldn't resist the Z9 because I could continue with my Nikon glass - specifically the 500PF and now the 800PF. There is an 800PF thread here too, BTW.

MatthewK wrote in post #19372123
First warbler encounter of the year for me here in Wisconsin! Yellow-rump Warblers haven't been a species I've been too successful with in the past, they have just never pose well for me. Maybe that's just the snooty Maryland variety, because these 'butter butts' here in Wisconsin are very friendly (same with the people, much nicer in Wi). These were taken right in my backyard, in the absolute most dreary light. Hope they stick around for a nice day, at least!

Hosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=193​72123&i=i239401293
forum: Nikon Lenses

Hosted photo: posted by MatthewK in
./showthread.php?p=193​72123&i=i148587677
forum: Nikon Lenses

Congrats Matt.

The 1st one is specifically nice. Well done (as always) with the wide-angle 500PF!

EyeSpyEagle wrote in post #19372431
Lol... I get it Chris. I have a gut feeling the (comparatively) lower end 200-600 may not resolve sufficiently to feed the high-res A1 sensor. I have seen some really nice images from that lens, but I have also seen at least as many that are more along the lines of what you describe.

I almost hate posting on the other sites (one in particular) due to the combative nature of so many of the folks there. I should have known better than to post the image my buddy took with his new 800PF + 2xTC, less than 24hrs after he got it. It was taken at a distance of approx 50 yards and the egret was surrounded by tall blades of grass so there was no separation between the bird & BG and bokeh flaming comments ensued. It was a mistake on my part. When he sent it to me, it looked pretty nice on my phone. I asked if he would mind if I shared it, so he sent me a jpg that when enlarged didn;t look as good but I ran with it anyway. LESSON LEARNED! lol!

Regarding size & weight... I had been moving in a smaller / lighter direction too, but I just couldn't resist the Z9 because I could continue with my Nikon glass - specifically the 500PF and now the 800PF. There is an 800PF thread here too, BTW.

Hi Phil,

Honestly, I thought your posted image with the 2.0TC was amazing given the focal length especially, and no reason not to post it as far as I am concerned. I am glad you did.

I quoted your post and yes, I raised the impression that the 800PF bokeh can look unattractive compared to that of a 400mm f2.8 or a 600mm f4 lens, but did not mean to refer to your posted image. I should have made that clear I now see reading it back, because not specifically stating to which image(s) I referred, can lead to misunderstanding.
Anyhow, just to set the record straight, this is the image that I felt had unattractive bokeh:

https://www.fredmirand​a.com …/topic/1753250/​1#15926252

I don't mind a bit of nervousness myself, but in this image there is an ugly kind of double lining or outlining. It may only be a scarce occasion where the bokeh turns out this way though, and it certainly is no reason for me to write the 800PF off. As I said in the post, I am very much impressed with the contrast and the handling of harsh light as illustrated in the images that you posted. These are exactly the areas where a lens like the Sony 200-600G falls short, but they áre areas that reveal a lot about the optical integrity of a lens. Add to that the weight and size for a 800mm f6.3 lens, and the fact that I would not need a TC to get the focal length I always wish for, and I think Nikon did a superb job here.

Chris1966 wrote in post #19372443
Hi Phil,

Honestly, I thought your posted image with the 2.0TC was amazing given the focal length especially, and no reason not to post it as far as I am concerned. I am glad you did.

I quoted your post and yes, I raised the impression that the 800PF bokeh can look unattractive compared to that of a 400mm f2.8 or a 600mm f4 lens, but did not mean to refer to your posted image. I should have made that clear I now see reading it back, because not specifically stating to which image(s) I referred, can lead to misunderstanding.
Anyhow, just to set the record straight, this is the image that I felt had unattractive bokeh:

https://www.fredmirand​a.com …/topic/1753250/​1#15926252

I don't mind a bit of nervousness myself, but in this image there is an ugly kind of double lining or outlining. It may only be a scarce occasion where the bokeh turns out this way though, and it certainly is no reason for me to write the 800PF off. As I said in the post, I am very much impressed with the contrast and the handling of harsh light as illustrated in the images that you posted. These are exactly the areas where a lens like the Sony 200-600G falls short, but they áre areas that reveal a lot about the optical integrity of a lens. Add to that the weight and size for a 800mm f6.3 lens, and the fact that I would not need a TC to get the focal length I always wish for, and I think Nikon did a superb job here.

10/4... I didn't mean to imply that your response was part of what I referred to - it was not.

I can easily take friendly critique / feedback from folks I consider friends (which absolutely includes you) and even random others, but those that seem to thrive on bashing or nitpicking everything tend to get under my skin quite quickly. It's that group that I was referring to.

Theresa & I are going to try to get to Florida next week since our last trip fell thru at the last minute. I guess it may have worked out in my favor since i can now take the 800PF. From that I hope to have more samples to post.

I only hope we have as much luck as Matt recently did!

EyeSpyEagle wrote in post #19372453
10/4... I didn't mean to imply that your response was part of what I referred to - it was not.

I can easily take friendly critique / feedeback from folks I consider friends (which absolutely includes you) and even random others, but those that seem to thrive on bashing or nitpicking everything tend to get under my skin quite quickly. It's that group that I was referring to.

Theresa & I are going to try to get to Florida next week since our last trip fell thru at the last minute. I guess it may have worked out in my favor since i can now take the 800PF. From that I hope to have more samples to post.

I only hope we have as much luck as Matt recently did!

You'll def have better luck than I did, if you go anywhere in FL aside from the Key West haha A dedicated Everglades/Ft. Desoto birding trip is in my future. Where are you and the missus heading to?

I avoid going to that other sight anymore, too many self-absorbed brand/gear worshippers and cult of personality for my liking. Go figure they'd find something to cry and hand-wring about (not you Chris, you're one of us, no worries :lol

Here's the same Yellow-rumped from yesterday, but the sun decided to come out, so the lighting (and pose) is a ton better:

MatthewK wrote in post #19372486
You'll def have better luck than I did, if you go anywhere in FL aside from the Key West haha A dedicated Everglades/Ft. Desoto birding trip is in my future. Where are you and the missus heading to?

I avoid going to that other sight anymore, too many self-absorbed brand/gear worshippers and cult of personality for my liking. Go figure they'd find something to cry and hand-wring about (not you Chris, you're one of us, no worries :lol

Here's the same Yellow-rumped from yesterday, but the sun decided to come out, so the lighting (and pose) is a ton better:


[ HOSTED PHOTO DISPLAY FAILED: ATTACH id 1156411 has been deleted. ]

Beautiful shot!

MatthewK wrote in post #19372486
You'll def have better luck than I did, if you go anywhere in FL aside from the Key West haha A dedicated Everglades/Ft. Desoto birding trip is in my future. Where are you and the missus heading to?

I avoid going to that other sight anymore, too many self-absorbed brand/gear worshippers and cult of personality for my liking. Go figure they'd find something to cry and hand-wring about (not you Chris, you're one of us, no worries :lol

Here's the same Yellow-rumped from yesterday, but the sun decided to come out, so the lighting (and pose) is a ton better:


[ HOSTED PHOTO DISPLAY FAILED: ATTACH id 1156411 has been deleted. ]

Damn, that's nice!

The plan is to arrive in Ft. Lauderdale quite early next Friday and visit Piccolo Park and see some burrowing owls and then spend a couple hours @ Butterfly World. From there, we'll head to Boynton Beach area & hopefully stop by Wakodahatchee and/or Green Cay late that afternoon. Up the next day and visit both Wakodahatchee Green Cay early.

From there, we'll be off to Vero Beach for a couple nights. Mornings & evenings @ Sebastian Inlet with one morning @ Blue Cypress Lake for an Osprey tour on a boat. These are all places we've been several times and enjoyed then tremendously. THe "new" part will be actually getting out on Blue Cypress Lake, vs. walking beach line.

Should be fun! At least that's the plan. Lol....

Limbwalker wrote in post #19372254
In my humble opinion, digital has still never equaled film for image quality. I look back at my old medium format Fuju Velvia 6x6 slides and often just shake my head at the three dimensional depth they have. Digital has never equaled that depth.

But I agree with the post above about Sony. I can spot a Sony image a mile away. A couple good friends went to Sony in the past few years and I could immediately tell the difference in IQ. But because they are good friends, I never said anything.

It's opinion, but I feel like this is nostalgia talking. This may be true vs. MF, but for us old 35mm shooters, digital lapped 35mm over a decade ago.

I'm sure you're right for 35mm. I guess I'm thinking back to my MF images. I still haven't seen a digital image that can compete with the depth of a MF velvia transparency.