Working with new 500mm PF

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
RBFresno Forum Pro • Posts: 12,866
Pretty Pleased w 500mm PF/TC 1.4 (Pics)

Chris Mak wrote:

Ricardo00 wrote:

Chris Mak wrote:

My intention to give the 500mmf4E a go comes mostly from using the 500PF in bright daylight with the 1.4TC on for the more distant subjects. It tends do develop some "glow", "hazy outline" and loses a clear transition from into focus to out of focus and vica versa.. . ...

I may go on a bit, but I would be happy if the Nikon 500f4E has the ability to shoot beautiful images with a 1.4TC when almost all lenses seem to give up, and their shooters also because of "atmospheric distortions". They (atmospheric distortions) sure do exist, and can truly ruin images, but I find that the term is often used to excuse lenses that simply shoot poorly in strong daylight when the distance is greater than 25m. The below image was at appr. 80m.

Maybe Chris you can provide an example of the "glow" and "hazy outline" that you are describing? I haven't heard that these lenses shoot poorly in strong light at a distance. I am often shooting under such conditions and have had distortions from heat waves reflecting off rocks and sand but don't see how any lens could differ in the handling of such conditions? But I would be interested to hear more about this and see how the Pentax lens would handle it.

Of course. I will add that the 500PF is better than the Canon 400DOII in bright daylight, because it has 100mm more reach bare and does not have to rely so heavily on the TC for reach. Still, it can become quite "glowy" where I would not yet expect it (you can see thermal distortion through the viewfinder if you know what to look for, so you get a warning when shooting is pointless).

Here is a sample taken with the 500PF+1.4TC on the Z7. You can rule mis-focussing out here, the Z7 is dead accurate with static wildlife in good light. The issue is that there simply is no fully "sharp" or clear DOF zone. The first one is with only light capture sharpening to show the glowiness, the second with normal sharpening to illustrate that such a shot is beyond rescuing. The Pentax shot in my earlier post was much more demanding: 784mm on 24mp apsc crop at a larger distance, and also needs proper sharpening to get a decent image, but it has all the fine detail neccessary to do so.

I no longer have the Pentax DA560 for a direct comparison, but I am sure it would have done significantly better here. So I will add another image in "torture" bright sunlight at an angle, where most say you can not take any image, again with the 1.4TC at 784mm. You can see the softish haze in the first image without sharpening, mostly due though to handholding 784mm as the DA560 has no VR, but again, all the detail is essentially there still and some mild sharpening in the second image sees it clear up to quite fine detail, a bit more sharpening and editing would reveal a useful image.

I hope these images help to illustrate what I am trying to say. These are downsampled images, but at full size the difference is very clear. I think these show it well enough.

But regardless of how ell these smaples show my point, I have experiences with these lenses over many thousands of shots in demanding light, and there is a clear difference. My hope is that the 500mmf4E performs more like the Pentax DA560 than like the Nikon 500PF in very bright (sunny) daylight.


I have the 500PF and have had the 500 VR for 7 years.

Although my use with the 500PF and the TC 14E III is limited, I've been pleasantly surprised by the IQ  of the 500PF/TC 14E III combination (other than being at f/8!):

(Click on Image for higher rez. These were  about a 30% crop if I remember correctly)

Best regards,


 RBFresno's gear list:RBFresno's gear list
Nikon D2H Nikon D4 Nikon D5 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +17 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow