They didn't have as much VR issues that I had. I personally know two other people who shoot with 500 pf with D850. I am not sure that it is entirely accurate in real-world usage. The MTF charts suggest that the 500 PF is sharper than Nikon 500 f4 G ED VR. I wonder if that is an quasi unscientific indication to say that pictures taken beyond 100 feet will likely not be sharp! Not a deal breaker.Ħ) The distance meter on 500 pf maxes out of 30 meters or approximately 100 feet, while it is 160 feet on a traditional 500 f4 prime. 200-500 VR is way better.ĥ) Occasionally, when you shoot against the bright sun or flare, the PF element in the lens turns the blue sky purple. A friend of mine has it & we shoot side by side & compare pics often.ģ) VR below 1/640 is not at all good when handheld. Sony 200-600 at f6.3 is way more sharper than 500pf.Ģ) Not very sharp when you don't fill the frame and you have to crop like 50-60%. Pic 3) Eagle owl - again body/eyes not perfectly sharp.ġ) Sharp at short distances (10 feet to 60 feet) at f5.6.Ģ) Fast auto focus, nearly as fast as 70-200 f2.8.ģ) Renders amazing 3D pop effect with other factors being equal.ĥ) Great for shooting slow motion video easy to use manual focus with it for video.ġ) Not at all sharp at a distance greater than 60-80 feet or so when shot at f5.6. Pic 2) Same sequence - but eyes not sharp despite the Montagu's harrier not flying very fast. I have sharpened the images quite a lot in post. NOTE: All the 3 pics taken with 500pf & D500. And no, a Z9 will be out of the question no matter what.
At the same time it seems that everyone here loves their 500 PF. Made me wonder if trading up would be worth it. The 500 PF is a very expensive lens here in Canada - almost 5K. Watching the video kind of stopped me in my tracks. Perhaps the issue is not the lens but rather the AF tracking of the Sony A9 he was using vs his D850. I have been thinking of selling my 200-500 and saving up for the 500. I believe he also tried similar scenes with his D500 and the 500 PF and also ended up with out of focus photos.Įverything I have read here (and elsewhere) suggests that the 500 PF is an incredible lens. It seems incredulous to me that every Nikon shot was blurry. In the video he described a situation where he photographed a bird flying towards him and was able to nail focus on every shot with the Sony A9 and 100-400 lens ( I believe), however when he repeated the same scene, bird flying towards him with his D850 and 500 PF, he could not get a single image in focus.
I was watching a video from Mark Smith today that he posted a year ago about why he switched from Nikon to Sony. Been lurking for a while and enjoy the forums.
0 kommentar(er)
