| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Bob
|
Any feedback on this lens? I tried one today - it is really light, and looks pretty sharp to me. It also has a reasonably short minmum focusing distance.I am teetering on the brink.......... |
|||||||||
jk
|
Take a look at Jeff (Blackfox) images in the Birds 2025 thread. Those were taken with a Tamron 150-600 I think. I have not seen any images from that Nikon 500mm f5.6 |
|||||||||
Eric
|
I had the 500mm PF lens. It was a brilliant, lightweight, fast focusing lens with some clever focus recall functions…sharp too. My only critique was that the fractal nature of the lens did seem to render bokeh harshly. It had a digital blockiness that when mixed with a bit of noise from high iso use could look ……well fractally! Sort of jaggy and more noticeable. Hard to explain except it was different and harsher/more obvious that straight noise. (Look at the darker areas of the Bullfinch photo below) Ideal lens for sport and wildlife. I didn’t mind the lack of zoom because I rarely got close enough to the subject to over fill the frame and (coupled with the D850) I could always crop with out loss of detail. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Take a look at Jeff (Blackfox) images in the Birds 2025 thread. Those were taken with a Tamron 150-600 I think. Most of my early bird photos were with that lens….  Click here to comment on this image. |
|||||||||
Bob
|
jk wrote:Take a look at Jeff (Blackfox) images in the Birds 2025 thread. Those were taken with a Tamron 150-600 I think. Couldn't find the Birds 2025 thread  |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Eric wrote:Most of my early bird photos were with that lens…. Great picture. Do you remember how close you were to the subject? I had a look through one on my camera this week, and I liked the feel of it. i went outside the shop and had a play. It focuses quite closely which would be good for my garden etc, but I'm not sure about the maximum distance at which I could get a decent image ; there weren't any suitable distance shots ie birds to enable me to make a meaningful judgement. I think it's a superb lens - I haven't boned up on the bokeh stuff yet so I wouldn't have known what I was looking at.Am I going to get a significant increase in image size/quality if I go for the Tamron 150-600? |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
Bob wrote:Couldn't find the Birds 2025 thread Here - https://nikondslr.uk/view_topic.php?id=2014 |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Eric wrote:Most of my early bird photos were with that lens…. Was that taken with the Nikon 500 or the Tamron 150-600? |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Bob wrote:Great picture. Do you remember how close you were to the subject? I had a look through one on my camera this week, and I liked the feel of it. i went outside the shop and had a play. It focuses quite closely which would be good for my garden etc, but I'm not sure about the maximum distance at which I could get a decent image ; there weren't any suitable distance shots ie birds to enable me to make a meaningful judgement. I think it's a superb lens - I haven't boned up on the bokeh stuff yet so I wouldn't have known what I was looking at.Am I going to get a significant increase in image size/quality if I go for the Tamron 150-600? Don’t get too hung up on the bokeh comment….many people didn’t seem as anal I was about it. lol Don’t get me wrong, I kept the lens for ages and it was only me deciding to try out Sony equipment that caused me to px the d850 and 500pf. If I am being honest ….if I had a magic wand I would try to go back to that combination.  Regarding distance I would say 50feet away. without going back to the original NEF I don’t know if it’s been cropped ….so it makes size comparison difficult. The other thing about the 500pf is the 1.4x teleconverter worked flawlessly with it only losing 1/2stop of light and gave c.750mm. I always believed that using teleconverter should be reserved for fixed prime lenses (like the 500pf) and not zooms, but the Sony 200-600 has been a revelation when coupled with its 1.4x converter. So maybe the Tamron would be ok? I believe Jeff (black fox) uses that lens but on a DX body(?)….so his 600mm is probably 840mm equivalent. Send him a PM and get his opinion….he is a very experience wildlife photographer. I cannot believe he would be using an inferior lens!!! For me the decision would be more about cost, weight, features* and need for zoom. *eg The 500pf has a lock-on feature that enables you to “store” a focus point, while enabling you to then carry on shooting other subjects until you want to return to the stored position/focus point. |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Eric wrote:Don’t get too hung up on the bokeh comment….many people didn’t seem as anal I was about it. lol Thanks - this digital stuff has so many options eg Chris's focus stacking.I will contact Jeff. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Bob wrote:Thanks - this digital stuff has so many options eg Chris's focus stacking.I will contact Jeff. Focus stacking is ok for static subjects. I couldn't find the original bull finch NEF file but this one is a full frame (uncropped) of another bird, from the same location/subject distance, same lens/camera on a different day. Its the Nikon D850 and 500pf lens with 1.4x converter so = 700mm. From memory about 50feet focus distance.  Click here to comment on this image. |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Eric wrote:Focus stacking is ok for static subjects. Aperture about f8 ? |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
f11 @ 1/250, ISO 2000 according to the exif data If you click on "Click here to comment on this image." under the photo, then click on the thumbnail in the top left corner of that page you will see aa button at the top labelled EXIF - that will tell you about the photo (if there is any embedded EXIF data) |
|||||||||
Eric
|
I was fighting for light on that day in the shaded woodland….hence the slower than normal shutter speed for a bird albeit perched. I wanted to keep the ISO down to max 2000 but at the same time the depth of field of 700mm (500 + 1.4x) is very shallow….using f11 gave me a few more mms depth of focus. |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Were you using a tripod? By the way, I have taken the plunge and, and I am now the proud owner of a nikon 500mm f5,6 PF ED VR etc. I took a few shots from the hip as it were, mainly handheld, but a couple resting of the rail of the verandah railing.  Click here to comment on this image. I played around with the various buzzers and bells in NX Studio, but technically it's not a masterpiece. I included this because I was concentrating on the pigeon, trying to get the eye sharp, and I completely missed the finch range about 35m maybe more. Click here to comment on this image. This one's closer, about 11m. Shame about the leaf. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Bob wrote:Were you using a tripod? What’s a tripod?  It was taken in a hide so just sort of rested on the hatch windowsill? There’s no point in having VR switched on if you are using a tripod….it works counterproductively. |
|||||||||
Bob
|
Eric wrote:What’s a tripod? I don't know why I asked that question........No doubt you have read the leaflets which come with the lenses. I have read differing statements on different lens instructions re using VR on a tripod - it seems to be conditional depending on whether there is a ball socket like a Benbow trekker which can be free to rotate, or a rigid attachment. Anyway, by the time you've set up the tripod, the bird has flown...... Anyway, |
|||||||||
jk
|
I have debated long and hard with myself over the value of VR. If you cannot or should not use on a tripod and it should not be useful if shutter speed is 1/250 or shorter e.g. 1/500, 1/1000, etc then it is only useful if you are hand holding the lens at shutter speeds of 1/30, 1/60, 1/125 so doesnt seem like a useful cost benefit item! |
|||||||||
chrisbet
|
I manage to handhold my 500mm reflex - no VR, no aperture (fixed at f8), no AF - and still get good images. Only get out the tripod when panning with my heavy Sony FS5 video gear - with all the accessories on it must weigh over 3 kilos! Shoulder mount is OK for short periods. |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I have never used a tripod for wildlife, the situation with wildlife is just too fluid. I have seen people set up with the camera/lens on a tripod and a Buzzard or something flys overhead and by the time they have released the camera from the tripod its gone. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Iain wrote:I have never used a tripod for wildlife, the situation with wildlife is just too fluid. I have seen people set up with the camera/lens on a tripod and a Buzzard or something flys overhead and by the time they have released the camera from the tripod its gone. I didnt know you were standing behind me watching, Iain. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Modern editor
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk Thank you. |