When it comes to photographing sports and, in particular, wildlife, this often requires a supertelephoto lens. Now, for full-frame and APS-C DSLRs, that often comes with some rather unpleasant consequences, namely extremely large and heavy lenses. Furthermore, these lenses also typically cost thousands upon thousands of dollars. However, there are a few lenses out there for your full-frame DSLRs that give you supertele reach without that supertele size and weight. Canon has a few 'Diffractive Optics' or DO lenses (those L-series lenses with the Green Ring), while Nikon has a similar series called Phase Fresnel lenses, which first debuted with the 300mm f/4E PF lens. These lenses use specially-design diffractive optical elements that allows lens designers to create smaller, lighter yet still-long telephoto lenses.Earlier this year Nikon their second Phase Fresnel lens, a lens. When we reviewed the lens, not only were we impressed by the optical quality but also at just how small and lightweight this full-frame DSLR lens was.
Amid all the excitement surrounding the launch of the Nikon Z-series recently, you could be forgiven for missing the official unveiling of Nikon's new Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm F5.6E PF ED VR. In this article, wildlife photographer Roie Galitz shares his impressions. Nikon AF-S Nikkor 500mm F5.6E PF ED VR is an Auto Focus (AF) Telephoto Prime lens with 35mm FF max sensor coverage. When mounted on a 35mm FF sensor camera, it will give you an FF equivalent focal range of 500mm.
Well, now the same can be said for the 500mm f/5.6E PF lens. While we haven't yet lab-tested this lens, the real-world images we've seen are simply fantastic, and as expected, the PF optical design creates a shockingly-small 500mm supertelephoto lens!
Nikon D500, 750mm-eq., f/5.6, 1/320s, ISO 1100Resident nature-lover and long-time Nikon shooter Jeremy Gray recently spent time, putting it to the test with some wintery wildlife up in Maine. Not only did he find the build quality up to the challenge of snowy weather conditions, but also the lightweight design and top-notch VR made it an excellent hand-holdable lens paired with cameras like the Nikon D500 and D800E. What's more, Jeremy found that the 500mm f/5.6E PF lens was also small and lightweight enough to pair well with the compact mirrorless camera along with the new FTZ adapter, mirroring the experience fellow photographer William Brawley had with this lens on the.To get a full rundown on how this lens handles in the field, including image quality, AF performance and build qualty, check out Jeremy's in-depth. Also, be sure to check out the extensive.
Update – see he full field report.You know, I feel sort of bad for the new Nikon 500 PF lens.With all the hype and hoopla surrounding the new Z6 and Z7 mirrorless cameras, this lens sort of got lost in the shuffle. In fact, I think Nikon should have given it an announcement day all its own. The truth is, it’s looking like a fairly impressive piece of glass. As a “first batch” user of the Nikon 300 PF (one of my favorite lenses), I’m looking forward to seeing how this one compares in the field.However, the lens isn’t available just yet, although the specification are.
In the video below, we’ll take a walk down Tech Spec lane and I’ll give you my take on this hunk of glass.PS – If you enjoyed this post, I think you’ll REALLY like my e-books, Secrets To Stunning Wildlife Photography and Secrets To The Nikon Autofocus System. They’re filled with hundreds of pages of information just like this. (hey, it’s free to look ? ). Hi Steve and others. I have had my new Nikon 500mm f5.6 for about two weeks now. I find it easy to use, image quality is great and AF acquisition is better than I had anticipated. I have not done a lot of low light shooting yet, so I have not tested out the AF in those conditions.
I have uncovered on BIG PROBLEM, the lens foot on the tripod collar mount. (The tripod collar mount is fixed to the lens and is not replaceable. ) I picked up the lens by the foot and the next thing I knew Read more ». Great article as usual but my question is more to do with small birds around eastern PA.
I want to improve cropped picture quality. I have a d500 and a 200-500 f5.6. To improve cropped quality I could 1) buy a d850 but not sure that pixel density is that much better than my d500, 2) replace my 200-500 with a 180-400 f4 tc1.4 – 1 stop better and faster focusing but big big bucks or 30 assume my 200-500 (which was rebuilt under warranty last month) will be good in that range but buy a 600mm f4 prime??? Hi Ralph – Well, I’d love to spend your money, but you already have the best rig for small birds – the D500 and 200-500. (The D850 has less pixel density).
The 600 F/4 seems like a good idea, but it doesn’t focus close enough – the 200-500 is much better and give greater magnification at minimum focus distance. If you’re at close range the 200-500 really is the way to go – it’s what I use for close quarters shots of warblers and works far better than the 600 F/4 for that purpose. Now, if you’re further out, the Read more ». Having a 500mm lens with the size and weight of a 70-200mm f/2.8 zoom lens is on the surface quite appealing. But my 500mm f/4 was also usable as a 700mm f/5.6 lens with a near doubling (96%) of the image size at 700mm. I will be traveling to Alaska and due to PenAir’s onerous carry-on restrictions I will be leaving the 600mm f/4 behind and taking the 200-500mm instead. If i had the 500mm f/5.6 lens I would be leaving it at home and taking the 200-500mm f/5.6.
With a prime telephoto and larger critters there is a tendency Read more ». Hi Steve,Thanks for the great video. Yes, this makes me hungry for having this peace in hands. I think you say something that this lens maybe handheld in the fields, as well as some comments below. As far as you will write about your field experiences, pls, comment on this. Now, I have both 300PF and 200-500.
The former is a great performer, even with 1,4 TC, handheld. The 200-500 is close to that but not exactly, due to its weight.
Now, my expectations are that 500PF could be better in that respect.B.r: Markku. Waste of money? Clearly you dont hike and walk in thick bush or in thick forests. Just try walking with a huge lens/huge bag/huge anything in the israeli bush.
This 500mm f5.6 is PERFECT for me, since i ONLY walk and search for gazelles and wild animals to photograph. A 500mm f4 is too long, too thick and too heavy to walk around with, run around with, or climb on a tree with when you are chased by an angry wild boar (which didnt happen to me, but im ready for everything, i encounter them often.).
This 500mm Read more ». Thanks Steve very comprehensive as always. He is Australia it will be a lot more $ however. I have an unrelated question. I see on some of your web videos that you sometimes use a Flash Extender over your Flash.
I gather this is for subjects up in the tree in some shadow? My Nikon sb-5000 flash has a separate diffuser dome & good reach up to 20m. What would be the advantage of having a flash extender wrapped around the flash.
Would it spread the light wider and more even? Does it not annoy the subjects/critters Read more ». Exactly Steveeven though there’s only 100mm difference between them, the 500E is a completely different experience than then 600E, the latter increasingly being restricted to tripod use (not the way I prefer to shoot).
On paper the 500PF sounds like a perfect lens, but there are just too many times where I need f4, so I just can’t shake the feeling that after spending all that $$$ on a new 500PF, the smart move would be to locate a lightly used 500E from someone trading to the 500PF. Now there’s a plan! ? All that being said, I’ll probably pick Read more ». Old thread but since I now have a 600G (really heavy) 500E and 500 PF I can tell you that if you are not in really low light situation the 500 PF is possibly the best walking around long lens you can buy. 500PF and D850 w/grip and large battery is only 6.38lbs which is less than the 500/f4. With a D500 without grip it is 5.63lbs. So if needing to hike a long ways I think it will be the perfect lens.
My opinion of course and others may think I’m completely wrong. Also, I have put, but not Read more ». I wondered about that myself but I did see other photographers, and reviewers, talk about the need to stop down a little using a 1.4 TC with that lens. Brad Hill has been writing about the 180-400 being one of the first “aperture independent sharpness” lens he’s seen, commenting that even great lens with a TC almost always need a little stopping down to reach maximum sharpness. I suspect the truth, for me, was somewhere in between, I had an ok, but not great copy.
At the end of the day though, even with a 1.4 TC I didn’t have Read more ». I agree – most lenses benefit form stopping down a bit, although I tend to live wide open ? My 600 F/4 E however, even with a TC, is seriously sharp wide open.
With my 600G I’d often stop down a bit (1/2 stop) even with the bare lens, to really maximize sharpness, but find no need to with the 600, with and without the TC. My 300 PF + TC is also very good.
There’s a very slight drop with that combo, but like I say, almost no difference – well, at least not enough to notice from field Read more ». Thanks, Steve! I agree, looks very appealing and at a price that is fairly inexpensive for Nikon! I’ll be curious to see where this fits in your work.
I have the 600 f4 and 300 pf also and as cool as this looks, I’m not sure it fills a necessity. I’m only a hobbyist but this certainly wouldn’t replace the 600 and with the 1.4 TC, the 300 pf closes the gap, and is a killer hiking set up. Definitely a slamdunk for someone that doesn’t want to dive into the big 500 or 600. Curious, did you end up Read more ».