Buy or rent (Page 2): I have shot the big's, I have owned a 500 4, and a 600 4, and a 200-400 4. And I gave them all up. Why? Because I found a much lighter zoom lens that I could...

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Mi630 wrote:

I understand there is no correct answer to this as... (show quote)

I have shot the big's, I have owned a 500 4, and a 600 4, and a 200-400 4. And I gave them all up. Why? Because I found a much lighter zoom lens that I could carry around much more easily and still get close to what I was getting with these big's. I now shoot with the Nikon 200-500 5.6 and the 300 f4, with the 500 5.6 on order (boy is it taking a long time to get this lens I ordered months ago).
My buddies down here in Florida wildlife sanctuary heaven shoot your rig. One of the gals who gets published a lot used to shoot with your your camera and the 100-400 II. She now shots with a Canon D5 Mark4 (I think that's right) it's a full frame. Any way she uses the same lens, the 100-400 II and with a Canon 1.4 tele converter and she gets really nice stuff with her new camera. Maybe you should consider a camera upgrade instead of a lens upgrade, your back will say THANK YOU.
I now have upgraded to the Nikon D850 and shoot the 200-500 and I like the images better than with the same lens and the Nikon D500. So, consider an upgrade to a full frame first.

photogeneralist Loc: Lopez Island Washington State

How long a focal length is too long? I have a Sony ILCA 77m2 (1.5 crop sensor) on which I mount a Sony 70-400 G Master lens (superb lens). That combo gives me a 105 to 600 mm full frame equivalency. The lens is heavy and my hands shaky. Shooting at 600 mm ff equiv, is mostly beyond my hand holding capability just trying to keep the subject in the viewfinder. Even on a tripod though , at 600 mm I frequently have trouble finding the subject in the viewfinder. Ground level shooting of fledgling eagles in their nests above the rim of the nest requires that I shoot from a long distance. I could use a longer lens for that shot BUT for most things, I find that my most used equivalent FF focal length is closer to 250-300 mm.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

Mi630 wrote:

I am mulling whether to buy a good used 500 mm f4 to extend my reach.

As previously stated, 400 with a 1.4 gives 560, more REACH than the 500. But the 500 does it at f/4!

If you eventually decide to buy, get a reconditioned one to save $$ as this lens new is $9,000 and you will need a way to support it at 7 lbs.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

I have never rented. If I see something I want, I get it and if it turns out not to my liking I simply sell/trade for something else.

cambriaman Loc: Central CA Coast

IMO the 500 doesn't make enough image size difference from the 400 end of the zoom. Its advantage is being a prime, it's probably sharper.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

DAN Phillips wrote:

It's a lot like borrowing something from a good friend. Let's say I borrow a 200-500 lens from him that I have been wanting and saving the money for. Something goes south and I break his lens. Now I have to replace his lens with the money I was going to buy the lens with. I loose my money and still do not have the lens. Buy, never borrow!

So, if you buy the lens and something goes south, what do you have then?

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

DWU2 wrote:

So, if you buy the lens and something goes south, what do you have then?

A lens with a southern drawl You'all.

cycle4fun

Mi630 wrote:

I understand there is no correct answer to this as... (show quote)

I have the same equipment you do and have a 500mm. I rarely use the 500mm because of weight. I do well with the 100-400 mk11 with a 1.4 ext.111. I may be selling the 500 soon. I'm 62 and got tired of lugging it around unless I had a special reason and wanted better IQ. Renting it is a great idea.

Naptown Gaijin

For lenses that big and that heavy, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, ALWAYS, rent at least one time to be damn sure that is what you want to buy. lensrentals.com will ship direct to your home and you can shoot for a few days for less than $200 or so, and that is a small fee when you are thinking about a 500mm lens (assuming it is a good quality lens).

LarryFB Loc: Depends where our RV is parked

NJFrank wrote:

Since they hold their value so well it seems that a few rental fees and you will have spent more than I would lose in depreciation.

I think you answered your own question. Use it just a few times and you break even. If you lose interest or don't want it anymore than we
sell it

Great answer, it makes a lot of sense.

That's three thumbs up!

lovemypups Loc: Kentucky

Mi630 wrote:

I understand there is no correct answer to this as... (show quote)

Last year during our vacation I rented the Canon 100-400 to try it out. We have a camera store an hour away from us and after previously making my reservation for the lens I wanted to try, we stopped on the way to our destination to pick it up. I really liked the lens, but did find it a bit heavy. This year I rented the Tamron 150-600 to see how that one would perform. After using it for a bit, it was REALLY heavy (I've had two rotator cuff surgeries) and decided right then and there I won't be getting the Tamron. I'm an odd ball, and don't like using a tripod (although I have one) I've rented 5 different lens just to try them out before making my final decisions. I know not all would do that, but I want to see, try out and know just what I'm going to be getting and will I be happy if I'm going to be spending a couple of my paychecks

Wishing you luck on whatever you choose to do

Mi630

I appreciate all the comments and suggestions. I have had a house full of electricians and heating/cooling people so have not looked at emails at all. Obviously there is no correct answer for everyone; only the best answer for me. Some mentioned the 100-400 with 1.4 ext and getting 560mm. I would plan on using the 1.4 with the 500 also to get extra reach if needed which puts me way past 560mm and still only 5.6. I’ll just have to think it out.

IBM

Mi630 wrote:

I appreciate all the comments and suggestions. I have had a house full of electricians and heating/cooling people so have not looked at emails at all. Obviously there is no correct answer for everyone; only the best answer for me. Some mentioned the 100-400 with 1.4 ext and getting 560mm. I would plan on using the 1.4 with the 500 also to get extra reach if needed which puts me way past 560mm and still only 5.6. I’ll just have to think it out.

I'm with the buyers, buy wisely and you will get your money back if you sell. if you keep it mint .and buying your own you get unlimited
Usage, that would you in the poor house if you rented, I would get the 500mm rather than six , I shoot a lot of eagles with a 300 mm
And there is so many but I have tough time getting a close shot ,but I know a 5oomm would just put me in a more keeper spot , if I go outside I see at least 10 or more in a 30 minuites drive in any direction . But when there sitting atop of a 100 foot fur tree it just won't
Cut it you can only enlarge so much , and

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

DAN Phillips wrote:

It's a lot like borrowing something from a good friend. Let's say I borrow a 200-500 lens from him that I have been wanting and saving the money for. Something goes south and I break his lens. Now I have to replace his lens with the money I was going to buy the lens with. I loose my money and still do not have the lens. Buy, never borrow!

Insurance!

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

lamiaceae wrote:

Insurance!

Make sure you are covered through either Home Owners or Renters insurance. Auto insurance usually does not cover personal property. Home Owners and Renters can.