Working with new 500mm PF

Started 4 months ago | Discussions
81258606 Regular Member • Posts: 216
Working with new 500mm PF
7

I just received my 500mm PF after a wait of nine months.  I went with a small camera store in Tucson, AZ and did not order with other stores concurrently.  I had to pay for the lens up front and was getting a little worried as the pandemic was putting a lot of stress on small businesses such as camera stores.

I'm 73 years and normally use a Nikkor 500mm f/4 lens with a TC 1.4III.  I've used the lens hand-held for almost five years.  I'm not a particularly strong person but find the tripod foot to be a great handle and carry the lens without a strap.  I think the 500mm f/4 is a terrific lens and works well with my D500 camera.

I was interested in the 500mm PF for those circumstances where I'd do more hiking and for travel where it would pack easier.

I have used it twice.  The first time, I added the TC 1.4 III and the second time without a TC.  With the TC, the lens seemed to do fine and focused almost as well as my 500mm f/4.  Without the TC, it seemed to focus a tad bit faster.  My observations of course are completely subjective.

I was astonished how small and light the 500 PF is.  I really have nothing new to add to the many posts over the last year or two.  Subjectively, I'd say it performs 90% as well as the 500mm f/4.  The obvious trade-off is weight vs performance.

I think the 500mm PF is excellent and worth having for the weight flexibility.  I use a strap with the 500mm PF.

Two small galleries are at:  https://bill3sarah.smugmug.com/Misc/AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-f56-PF-ED-VR

Some pics:

With TC 1.4 III

Without TC 1.4 III

Nikon D500
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
LensWizard
LensWizard Senior Member • Posts: 1,376
Re: Working with new 500mm PF
1

I had no idea how difficult it was to obtain one until I was reading on here about it. I only last week just for the heck ask the Nikon Dealer if he had one along with a D850 and the next day it was here. Looks like people here in States are still waiting to get one.. Your pictures look very nice..

-- hide signature --

Canon XLH1 Video, Profoto AcuteR2400, Eizo 27Inch CG277 Monitor, MSI GT80S Laptop, MSI Vortex G-65 Desktop, Wimberly Mk2 Head, Gitzo 5540LS Tripods (2), Arca Swiss Monoball Head, Macbook Pro 15inch Retna Display,Arca Swiss C1 Cube Head, Apple Mac Pro (6) Core 3.5GHZ Dual AMD700's

 LensWizard's gear list:LensWizard's gear list
Leica SL2 Canon EOS-1D Mark II N Canon EOS 5D Canon EOS-1Ds Leica SL (Typ 601) +26 more
Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,462
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

The 500PF is a wonderful lens. You have to hold it to believe how light and small it is. I waited for 1,5 years to get mine.

What 500/4 lens do you use though? I want to add the 500/4E for use with the 1.4TC as a 700/5.6 combo. The 500PF+1.4TC works fine for closer to medium distance, but falls a bit short when you want to reach out a bit further for distant or small wildlife/birds.

The bare lens is great though, even over longer distance, as long as the light does not provoke a certain "glow" which can happen with strong (counter) light.

Enjoy the lens!

81258606 wrote:

I just received my 500mm PF after a wait of nine months. I went with a small camera store in Tucson, AZ and did not order with other stores concurrently. I had to pay for the lens up front and was getting a little worried as the pandemic was putting a lot of stress on small businesses such as camera stores.

I'm 73 years and normally use a Nikkor 500mm f/4 lens with a TC 1.4III. I've used the lens hand-held for almost five years. I'm not a particularly strong person but find the tripod foot to be a great handle and carry the lens without a strap. I think the 500mm f/4 is a terrific lens and works well with my D500 camera.

I was interested in the 500mm PF for those circumstances where I'd do more hiking and for travel where it would pack easier.

I have used it twice. The first time, I added the TC 1.4 III and the second time without a TC. With the TC, the lens seemed to do fine and focused almost as well as my 500mm f/4. Without the TC, it seemed to focus a tad bit faster. My observations of course are completely subjective.

I was astonished how small and light the 500 PF is. I really have nothing new to add to the many posts over the last year or two. Subjectively, I'd say it performs 90% as well as the 500mm f/4. The obvious trade-off is weight vs performance.

I think the 500mm PF is excellent and worth having for the weight flexibility. I use a strap with the 500mm PF.

Two small galleries are at: https://bill3sarah.smugmug.com/Misc/AF-S-Nikkor-500mm-f56-PF-ED-VR

Some pics:

With TC 1.4 III

Without TC 1.4 III

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon D500 Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 +1 more
OP 81258606 Regular Member • Posts: 216
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

I use the latest 500mm f/4 with the TC1.4 III.  I’d say it is 10% better than the PF but heavier of course.

Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,462
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

81258606 wrote:

I use the latest 500mm f/4 with the TC1.4 III. I’d say it is 10% better than the PF but heavier of course.

Thanks.

10% is not a lot, taking into account that the 500F4E will set you back 11000,-

I will be sure to rent one first. It should do much better with the 1.4TC at 700mm f5.6 though than the f8 500PF+1.4TC (more than 10%), the laws of physics practically dictate that. From using f4 and f5.6 lenses with a 1.4TC, I have found that f4 lenses have better AF with a 1.4TC, have better "clarity", better micro-contrast and better color rendering. I would be disappointed if the 500mmf4E would not be at the level of eg. the Canon 400mmF4DOII that I used before I changed to Nikon. But it is possible I guess.

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon D500 Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 +1 more
talons1555 Junior Member • Posts: 27
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

I can't stress enough, replace the foot, it is an accident waiting to happen. I replaced mine with the Henjar h129.  Works great.

ARClark
ARClark Veteran Member • Posts: 3,969
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

Chris Mak wrote:

81258606 wrote:

I use the latest 500mm f/4 with the TC1.4 III. I’d say it is 10% better than the PF but heavier of course.

Thanks.

10% is not a lot, taking into account that the 500F4E will set you back 11000,-

I will be sure to rent one first. It should do much better with the 1.4TC at 700mm f5.6 though than the f8 500PF+1.4TC (more than 10%), the laws of physics practically dictate that. From using f4 and f5.6 lenses with a 1.4TC, I have found that f4 lenses have better AF with a 1.4TC, have better "clarity", better micro-contrast and better color rendering. I would be disappointed if the 500mmf4E would not be at the level of eg. the Canon 400mmF4DOII that I used before I changed to Nikon. But it is possible I guess.

I own the 500 PF and 500 f4E and used to own a 500 f/4 afs-ii. The PF is an excellent lens, but when it comes to shooting with a TC, I consider the 500E to be in a different league, especially in less than ideal light. With a TC-14E iii, AF speed of the 500E barely slows; it’s sharp at 700mm @f/5.6; and Af focus points aren’t limited like with the 500 PF and TC @f/8. I also get better results for distance shooting with the 500E, and can shoot at lower ISOs for better feather detail.

I’m close in age to the OP, and like him, I typically shoot handheld with the 500 f/4. Despite the weight, the 500E and TC14 is my preferred combination for most bird photography.

When I shoot with the 500 PF, I generally find it more enjoyable to use without a TC. It’s capable of excellent results with a TC, but I often find the AF struggles at f/8 to be cumbersome, particularly in tricky light and lower contrast scenes.

Alan

 ARClark's gear list:ARClark's gear list
Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +13 more
Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,462
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

ARClark wrote:

I own the 500 PF and 500 f4E and used to own a 500 f/4 afs-ii. The PF is an excellent lens, but when it comes to shooting with a TC, I consider the 500E to be in a different league, especially in less than ideal light. With a TC-14E iii, AF speed of the 500E barely slows; it’s sharp at 700mm @f/5.6; and Af focus points aren’t limited like with the 500 PF and TC @f/8. I also get better results for distance shooting with the 500E, and can shoot at lower ISOs for better feather detail.

I’m close in age to the OP, and like him, I typically shoot handheld with the 500 f/4. Despite the weight, the 500E and TC14 is my preferred combination for most bird photography.

When I shoot with the 500 PF, I generally find it more enjoyable to use without a TC. It’s capable of excellent results with a TC, but I often find the AF struggles at f/8 to be cumbersome, particularly in tricky light and lower contrast scenes.

Alan

Thanks for sharing your experience with both lenses.

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. A lot of words to say that I find the clarity and definition over longer distance in bright light with a 1.4TC on lacking. Perhaps I should add that my "reference" lens for this type of shooting is the Pentax DA560mm f5.6. I used that lens for five years before switching to Canon with the 7DII+400DOII because of the lacking AF capabilities of the Pentax, but I was confronted with the 400DOII's inability to shoot clear images in strong daylight (with a 1.4TC on) especially in spring bird migration time. I switched to Nikon when canon dropped development of the 7DIII, because of the D500 sensor and the 500PF.

Here is an example of the Pentax DA560mm on the 24mp K3 crop body with the 1.4TC on, so 784mm on 1.5x crop. I did nothing to the image, no clarity filters or complicated image treatment and only very light sharpening, to show how much detail the DA560 could capture in harsh bright spring daylight, shooting over water, with a 1.4TC on.

I reshot this sort of image with the 400DOII+1.4TC on in the same time of year at the same time of day in the same wheather at the same angle. It was mush, full of "jitters, haze and no clear zone of sharpness. And this 400DOII lens could be bitingly sharp and clear in "gentle" light with a 1.4TC on. It made me wonder if modern high end lenses are at all designed to be shot "out in the open", or whether they are fullly optimized for shooting at the golden hour, at dusk or at twilight. Again and again I have read the remarks that you should not shoot in full daylight, that no lens can produce a useable image in full bright daylight. Well the below image, with some minor tasteful editing can be hung upon my wall, and I have lots of beautiful images of songbirds or wading birds in bright spring daylight from the Pentax DA560.

Also notice the very clear transition through (into and out of) the sharpness zone. And this is without any editing and software trickery, and virtually no sharpening. So my question would be: can the Nikon 500mm f4E + 1.4TC achieve this type of rendering in what would be considered "impossible light" due to atmospheric distortions, air haze etc.

It has been quite a learning path for me, and I now debate whether I should give the 500mmf4E a chance, or simply re-purchase the Pentas DA560 with the coming new APS-C body and be done with it, and still use the 500PF for all the times I can use its strong sides, which are plenty.

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.

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon D500 Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 +1 more
Ricardo00 Contributing Member • Posts: 804
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

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.

 Ricardo00's gear list:Ricardo00's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D7200 Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR Nikkor AF-S 300mm f/4E PF ED VR Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED VR II +6 more
Chris Mak Senior Member • Posts: 2,462
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

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.

 Chris Mak's gear list:Chris Mak's gear list
Nikon Z7 Nikon D500 Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon AF-S Teleconverter TC-14E III Nikon Z 50mm F1.8 +1 more
h2odavid Regular Member • Posts: 219
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

Small barn owls with a sb-800 at night. It is a great light weight lens

I have tried a few shots with the 1.4 tc newest version. The are good, but not as spectacular as shots with the bare lens.

ARClark
ARClark Veteran Member • Posts: 3,969
Re: Working with new 500mm PF

Chris Mak wrote:

ARClark wrote:

I own the 500 PF and 500 f4E and used to own a 500 f/4 afs-ii. The PF is an excellent lens, but when it comes to shooting with a TC, I consider the 500E to be in a different league, especially in less than ideal light. With a TC-14E iii, AF speed of the 500E barely slows; it’s sharp at 700mm @f/5.6; and Af focus points aren’t limited like with the 500 PF and TC @f/8. I also get better results for distance shooting with the 500E, and can shoot at lower ISOs for better feather detail.

I’m close in age to the OP, and like him, I typically shoot handheld with the 500 f/4. Despite the weight, the 500E and TC14 is my preferred combination for most bird photography.

When I shoot with the 500 PF, I generally find it more enjoyable to use without a TC. It’s capable of excellent results with a TC, but I often find the AF struggles at f/8 to be cumbersome, particularly in tricky light and lower contrast scenes.

Alan

Thanks for sharing your experience with both lenses.

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. A lot of words to say that I find the clarity and definition over longer distance in bright light with a 1.4TC on lacking. Perhaps I should add that my "reference" lens for this type of shooting is the Pentax DA560mm f5.6. I used that lens for five years before switching to Canon with the 7DII+400DOII because of the lacking AF capabilities of the Pentax, but I was confronted with the 400DOII's inability to shoot clear images in strong daylight (with a 1.4TC on) especially in spring bird migration time. I switched to Nikon when canon dropped development of the 7DIII, because of the D500 sensor and the 500PF.

Here is an example of the Pentax DA560mm on the 24mp K3 crop body with the 1.4TC on, so 784mm on 1.5x crop. I did nothing to the image, no clarity filters or complicated image treatment and only very light sharpening, to show how much detail the DA560 could capture in harsh bright spring daylight, shooting over water, with a 1.4TC on.

I reshot this sort of image with the 400DOII+1.4TC on in the same time of year at the same time of day in the same wheather at the same angle. It was mush, full of "jitters, haze and no clear zone of sharpness. And this 400DOII lens could be bitingly sharp and clear in "gentle" light with a 1.4TC on. It made me wonder if modern high end lenses are at all designed to be shot "out in the open", or whether they are fullly optimized for shooting at the golden hour, at dusk or at twilight. Again and again I have read the remarks that you should not shoot in full daylight, that no lens can produce a useable image in full bright daylight. Well the below image, with some minor tasteful editing can be hung upon my wall, and I have lots of beautiful images of songbirds or wading birds in bright spring daylight from the Pentax DA560.

Also notice the very clear transition through (into and out of) the sharpness zone. And this is without any editing and software trickery, and virtually no sharpening. So my question would be: can the Nikon 500mm f4E + 1.4TC achieve this type of rendering in what would be considered "impossible light" due to atmospheric distortions, air haze etc.

It has been quite a learning path for me, and I now debate whether I should give the 500mmf4E a chance, or simply re-purchase the Pentas DA560 with the coming new APS-C body and be done with it, and still use the 500PF for all the times I can use its strong sides, which are plenty.

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.

Sorry Chris, but based on my experience, no silver bullet with the 500E for overcoming daytime "atmospheric distortions". Midday light refraction affects all of my long lenses when there are masses of varying air densities moving between the subject and the lens that bend the light waves.  I should add that any of the lenses are capable of getting sharp images in the middle of the day under conducive atmospheric conditions,  For example, I got sharp images of surfers from noon to 3 pm last summer with both the 500PF/TC14 combo and my older 500D/TC14 combo.  But many a time in shooting wintering waterfowl here in NC, I find it's not worth shooting from mid morning to late afternoon, and I've shot tens of thousands of frames with multiple long lenses to prove it time and time again. 

Alan

 ARClark's gear list:ARClark's gear list
Nikon 500mm F5.6E PF Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 16-85mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Tokina AT-X Pro 11-16mm f/2.8 DX +13 more
RBFresno
RBFresno Forum Pro • Posts: 12,883
Pretty Pleased w 500mm PF/TC 1.4 (Pics)
1

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.

Hi!

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,

RB

 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
PHXAZCRAIG
PHXAZCRAIG Forum Pro • Posts: 16,761
Re: Pretty Pleased w 500mm PF/TC 1.4 (Pics)

RB, you have any opinion on TC-14E II versus E III?

Just received my 500pf, and have an E II, but I'm generally not impressed with putting a TC on an F5.6 lens.  Wondering if it is worth it to replace with the newer version.   Previous experience was it really only worked with my 300F4 AF-S, and it slowed the autofocus down too much on my slow zooms.

-- hide signature --

Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net
"In theory, practice and theory are the same. In practice, they're not."

 PHXAZCRAIG's gear list:PHXAZCRAIG's gear list
Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D800E +37 more
Gary2010
Gary2010 Contributing Member • Posts: 569
Re: Pretty Pleased w 500mm PF/TC 1.4 (Pics)

PHXAZCRAIG wrote:

RB, you have any opinion on TC-14E II versus E III?

Just received my 500pf, and have an E II, but I'm generally not impressed with putting a TC on an F5.6 lens. Wondering if it is worth it to replace with the newer version. Previous experience was it really only worked with my 300F4 AF-S, and it slowed the autofocus down too much on my slow zooms.

I have the 1.4ii and just purchased the 1.4iii.  After our trip we are on, I will be testing the two.  I mainly bought it he iii to use with my 500 f4G but intend to use it with the 500 pf also.  I will let you know.

 Gary2010's gear list:Gary2010's gear list
Olympus Tough TG-4 Nikon D850 Nikon D500 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon 200-500mm F5.6E ED VR +13 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads