Nikkor 500 or 600f4

[shane shacaluga]

I have finally saved enough for either of these 2 lenses and now I am completely undecided

I would like to go with the 600 as have tried it a few weeks back and it can be handheld but i would need to be in one spot and not mobile as I usually am

The 500 would be easier to hike with and to travel with as well but would sacrifice the 100mm of reach (more with the TC)

My D800e does allow me to crop nicely but if I am going to spend the cash i dont want to regret not going for the bigger lens and get the frame filling images I would like

Any help taking the decision would be appreciated

Thanks
Shane

[Mike Milicia]

I went with the 500mm when I first bought a supertelephoto 9 years ago and I think I would stick with that decision if and when I can come up the funds to replace it with the newer version mostly because of the travel issues. I can fit the 500mm, 2 pro bodies, 24-70, 70-200, 1.4x and 2x teleconverters, flash, and a few more odds and ends in a standard airline regulation 9x14x22 roll-aboard and still have some room to spare. I am more limited by the 40 lb. weight limit than I am by volume. This enables hassle-free travel on all but some of the very smallest commuter planes. As much as I would like to have the extra 100mm, it would complicate travel on anything other than the large jets. Of course, in the ideal world, I would have both and take the 600mm when I know I will only be on the larger planes but I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

[arash_hazeghi]

The Nikon 600VR is a front heavy lens. You can hand hold it for short periods but it would be tough to walk around with it and hand hold it day in and day out. It can put a lot of stress on your neck/shoulder.

If you want to use a tripod then sure get the longer lens but if you want to use it handheld get the lighter lens.

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks guys. I was lucky enough to find a guy with the 500 this afternoon and it is indeed very easy to handhold. Will need to have a good think before i make my decision

[Ashley Cohen]

I know how you feel Shane I've switched Gear a lot in recent years and have had to decide on one lens or the other based on weight and reach. I've also owned a Nikon 500mm F4 VR so if yo u have any further questions you can PM me if you like.

The question really comes down to your type of photography and what you feel is right for that. I have a friend who shoots on the Nikon 500mm with a D800 https://www.flickr.com/photos/phil-johnston-photography and he gets stunning images and uses the lens without converters. He has good field craft and doesn't use hides for his every day shots. However when you move away from woodland birds you end up wanting more reach. I honestly don't think there's much between a 500 and 600 in every day use. With the pixel count of the D800 you'll be able to crop to similar and save your back/neck from carrying around a very heavy lens. I remember when I had the 500 and now having the 200-400mm if Im walking about with it the weight really starts to hit me.

If your the type of photographer however that shoots things at a distance, usually uses hides, sets up at a location or drives somewhere and just has a short walk to where you want to take images then a 600mm would probably be better. Also I have should ask what shorter lens do u have to use when 600mm is too much because at times it will be? I think I remember you having a 300mm F4 if Im not mistaken? That lens and 600mm would be a good combination of shorter and long. Really the weight is a key factor in your choice I think. It's a shame nikon don't make a 600mm that weights the same as canons Mk II.

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks for the comments Ashley. I do have the 300 f4 which i use with a 1.7x convertor but feel this affects the af speed and light too much. The lens does not have VR which is also annoying when trying to shoot perched birds handheld using slower SS

i would probably end up using the 500 with the 1.4x tc attached most of the time as my shots are usually of migrating raptors which rarely come too close

i could keep the 300 for travel and long walks and upgrade it with the vr version when it appears, and get the 600 as a main lens, or ditch the 300 and just use the 500 with various TC's for everything including travel and hiking

will try and get access to a 600 over the next couple of days and see what conclusions i come to

i may PM you after i test the 600

regards

[Ashley Cohen]

No worries feel free to PM Me about it, I didn't use it for too long but a few months. I think your primary subject is migrating birds of prey at long distances you'll be better off with all the focal length you can get so the 600mm would be better. If your hiking to the spots with the lens then you might consider the 500mm instead due to the weight. It's hard to say but I think I'd still go for the 600mm though.

[Dan Brown]

The new 80-400vr is worth considering. Very sharp, fast focus, takes the TC's, awesome vr and is way lighter than the big boys!

[Ashley Cohen]

I don't see how it can compare to either of these lenses. if your going for a big prime, go for one or you'll just regret it. I even regretted going for 300mm F2.8 MK II canon for longer reach work as I was always putting on the 2x TC.

[Dan Brown]

You are correct, l was thinking that the 80-400 would be a good lens to go with the big prime but forgot to add that! :-(

I don't see how it can compare to either of these lenses. if your going for a big prime, go for one or you'll just regret it. I even regretted going for 300mm F2.8 MK II canon for longer reach work as I was always putting on the 2x TC.

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks guys. I was thinking about that zoom lens a few months ago but was not sure it was going to be much different to my actual setup apart from the VR as its an f8 with the tc on

I guess my worry is getting the 600 and then realising its a logistical problem to use regularly and travel with, or getting the 500 and regretting the lack of reach

serious first world problems

[Bill Jobes]

The Nikon 600mm is 3.1 pounds heavier than the Nikon 500mm.

The Nikon 600mm is 2.1 inches longer and 2 inches wider than the Nikon 500.

If you're a long-distance, daylong trekker, that 3 pounds is going to make a significant difference.

The weight may also make a carry-on flight difference, but not so sure the physical dimensions will matter that much.

I have owned both lenses. Only one 500. I am now on my third 600mm, having upgraded a few times.

I can hand-hold it, and walk a few miles with it on a tripod, over the shoulder. Mostly on flat-lander territories.

Image-wise, regardless of your choice, both are amazing instruments.

I've favored the 600 for the reach alone, in spite of the physical size and weight.

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks for the extra info. I have until the end of the month to think about this then I will take the plunge.

So far i am leaning towards the 500 because i will use it a lot more i am sure. I may not get a few shots with the 500 that i would have with the 600, but i wont get any shots at all in many situations were i would be happy taking the 500 but not be willing to take the 600. When i go on long hikes, out in my boat or when I travel for work for example

I will keep pondering on this until my bonus hits.

[Randy Stout]

Shane"

I have both the 600 and 500, and find I shoot with the 600 about 90% of the time, only taking the 500 if I want to handhold ( which of course works well for BIF)

But, I don't fly often, and don't have to hike long distances to get to my subjects, usually, so that makes a real difference.

I generally shoot larger birds, esp. loons, but still find the extra reach of the 600 valuable.

I almost always used to have a TC on the 500 while shooting off the tripod, which is why I went to the 600.

I would think Nikon is feeling some pressure to update their super teles in response to the excellent Canon upgrades, but haven't heard anything yet.

I shoot with a D4, so don't have the cropping ability you have.

Tough decision for sure, flexibility of 500 vs reach of the 600.

Good luck.

Cheers

Randy

[Juan Carlos Vindas]

I hate to crop my beloved pixels no matter how many I have. I am a Canon user and I was on the same dilema as you but I came away with the 600f/4 due to the fact that most birds in my country are rather spooky so the extra 100mm can make a huge difference in my personal case.

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks Juan Carlos, i am also starting to think along those lines. I will most likely bite the bullet and go for the 600 in the end


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Steve Robinso]

I have a 500vr and I am not satisfied with it, even using it on a tripod its very very hit and miss, I have better and more consistent results with my Nikon 300mm f4 with a 1.4x tele even though I lose a stop, I also have the D800e

I have finally saved enough for either of these 2 lenses and now I am completely undecidedI would like to go with the 600 as have tried it a few weeks back and it can be handheld but i would need to be in one spot and not mobile as I usually amThe 500 would be easier to hike with and to travel with as well but would sacrifice the 100mm of reach (more with the TC)My D800e does allow me to crop nicely but if I am going to spend the cash i dont want to regret not going for the bigger lens and get the frame filling images I would likeAny help taking the decision would be appreciatedThanksShane

[shane shacaluga]

Thanks for the input. That is the first i hear of the 500. I have decided to wait a bit as it seems the new version 400, 500 and 600 are out soon.

There will probably be a number of owners upgrading and may get a nice used one or a new version if its too good to miss.

[Bill Jobes]

Steve,

Your experience with the Nikon 500VR is most definitely an anomaly.

Far from being a 'hit and miss' lens, it is one of Nikon's three top lenses, as proven by thousands of users, including countless professionals every day shooting the most demanding action subjects in sports and nature. The other two being the 300 2.8 and the 600 F/4 (in all versions).

There's a good chance yours has an AF issue that would benefit from a look-over by Nikon service or a highly qualified authorized dealer.

If it were my lens, and I intended to keep it, I'd ship it off to Nikon for a check-up,

- Bill

I have a 500vr and I am not satisfied with it, even using it on a tripod its very very hit and miss, I have better and more consistent results with my Nikon 300mm f4 with a 1.4x tele even though I lose a stop, I also have the D800e

[Steve Robinso]

Ha I feel a little foolish now I upped the minimum shutter speed to 1/1600th and now getting very consistent results also removed the tripod foot so I have to actually hold the lens now and the hit rate has gone up ten fold even at quite lowish shutter speeds...Would like a 600 though to try as a comparison