Nikon 500PF vs Nikon 600PF vs Nikon 840PF (600 + 1.4)
Nov 28, 2023 11:54:32 #
Just got my 600PF. Wanted to compare it to my old 500PF. Took a few days to get the same bird in the same spot. All taken from the same spot, about 35', lighting varied.
Presented for your own observations.
CM
Presented for your own observations.
CM
Nov 28, 2023 12:31:38 #
Nov 28, 2023 16:09:01 #
Nov 28, 2023 17:03:31 #
Why does the bird look so much bigger with the 500mm than the 600mm? All must be cropped?
Nov 28, 2023 17:11:04 #
I cropped them all to as close to the same size as possible. The point was to see the detail difference.
CM
CM
Nov 28, 2023 18:59:47 #
Nov 28, 2023 19:21:16 #
capmike wrote:
I cropped them all to as close to the same size as possible. The point was to see the detail difference.
CM
CM
Cropping and resizing defeats seeing the detail differences ... I would think.
The largest 'bird in image' was shot with the shortest lens.
---
Nov 28, 2023 20:58:54 #
I don't see a lot of difference in the images. They are nice, but with the noisy, high ISO appearance, there is very little detail in the feathers. At least on my monitor. They are all acceptable images for screen display.
If you are trying to decide which lens to choose for use in the field, you should be asking other questions. What are the sizes and distances of your subjects, would be is a better thing to consider. How mobile your subjects are for targeting will also alter the choice of lens. All of the samples you provided are decent, the real selection is in the field functionality of the lens. Many photographers shoot a very specific subject selection and they could choose one over the other. I happen to capture a wide range of subjects, and have found the modern zoom lenses more useful.
If you are trying to decide which lens to choose for use in the field, you should be asking other questions. What are the sizes and distances of your subjects, would be is a better thing to consider. How mobile your subjects are for targeting will also alter the choice of lens. All of the samples you provided are decent, the real selection is in the field functionality of the lens. Many photographers shoot a very specific subject selection and they could choose one over the other. I happen to capture a wide range of subjects, and have found the modern zoom lenses more useful.
Nov 29, 2023 07:32:45 #
tcthome
Loc: NJ
To me, looking at these photos. I would ditch the 1.4TC. The 600pf looks the cleanest but it looks like the 500pf photo might have been taken at a higher ISO. Looking at some of yours & sineworms great photos, (think that is his user ID) I was wondering, does the Z9 have focus peaking in the EVF?
Nov 29, 2023 09:21:17 #
capmike wrote:
Just got my 600PF. Wanted to compare it to my old 500PF. Took a few days to get the same bird in the same spot. All taken from the same spot, about 35', lighting varied.
Presented for your own observations.
CM
Presented for your own observations.
CM
To be a valid comparison, they all need to be at the same f-stop and ISO and subject size.......SOC - and even this does not account for potential AF speed differences.
Nov 29, 2023 11:19:44 #
Thank you for the confirmation that a good 1.4x converter you can achieve excellent results. Many will simply say “never use them”. In the past, that may have been true, but not with the newer equipment. I never hestitate to put Sony’s 1.4x or 2X converter on my most of my Sony telephotos.
Nov 29, 2023 12:36:08 #
Nov 29, 2023 19:46:45 #
tcthome wrote:
To me, looking at these photos. I would ditch the 1.4TC. The 600pf looks the cleanest but it looks like the 500pf photo might have been taken at a higher ISO. Looking at some of yours & sineworms great photos, (think that is his user ID) I was wondering, does the Z9 have focus peaking in the EVF?
Sinewsworn. I agree. Try to match lighting conditions for each representative shot. I find my 600pF to be a bit cleaner than my 500pF. I get bird shots at around 300 yards out sharp with decent detail, even in atmospheric distortion conditions. Yes it has focus peaking that works well. Backgrounds are another important question.
Nov 29, 2023 19:51:49 #
It may be my eyes but the 600 with and without the teleconverter is sharper on the bird's eye unless it was you.
Nov 30, 2023 13:37:47 #
Mike,
Looking at the exif data, the 500mm and 600mm were not shot at the same settings. The 500mm was shot at 1/1600 second, aperture at f/8, and 7200 ISO, and the 600mm was shot at 1/400 second, aperture f/7.1, and 2200 ISO.
To my eyes, the 500mm PF looks sharper than the 600mm PF, and that is most likely due to the difference in shutter speed, even though the 500mm appears to me to be a little bit noisier at 7200 ISO than the 600mm.
Vince
Looking at the exif data, the 500mm and 600mm were not shot at the same settings. The 500mm was shot at 1/1600 second, aperture at f/8, and 7200 ISO, and the 600mm was shot at 1/400 second, aperture f/7.1, and 2200 ISO.
To my eyes, the 500mm PF looks sharper than the 600mm PF, and that is most likely due to the difference in shutter speed, even though the 500mm appears to me to be a little bit noisier at 7200 ISO than the 600mm.
Vince
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.