Nikon 500 PF Review

It’s finally here – my Nikon 500 PF review and full field report! And let me tell you, it’s a doozy! 

In fact, I may have to apologize for the length. This review is really detailed and goes on for a bit longer than I wanted. I’ve had so many questions about this lens and there are so many different facets to it that it was difficult to keep it down to just the video you see below. Plus, I’ve had tons of questions about it, and I wanted to make sure those were addressed as well. Although the way I figure it, if you’re in the market for a $3600 lens, you probably don’t mind some extra details and tips for field use. 

As for coverage, this 500PF review pulls no punches. We start off looking at build (and talk about a major design flaw with the foot/collar), then we discuss handing (my favorite aspect of this lens), then it’s on to things like VR performance, TC performance (or lack thereof), sharpness and on and on. There’s a lot to it, so I’ll stop babbling at the keyboard and let you get to it. 

Oh, and after the video, check out the sharpness tests below – and some of my favorite photos from the field test. Enjoy!

 

 

500 PF Sharpness Tests

Please Note – the images have been resized for this page. Click the image to get the full-size version in a new tab (you may have to click them one more time when they open to get to full size, depending on your screen resolution). Also, remember my 300PF isn’t quite as sharp on the left side as the right. (That’s why you gotta watch the video first!)

Below is the test target used for the tests and the regions featured in the images below:

Test #1 – 500 PF Vs. 200-500

Test #2 – 500 PF Vs. 300 PF (and 300 PF + TC)

With 1.4TC E III Attached (420mm)

Test #3 – 500 PF Vs. 600 F/4 E

 

 

Field Test Photos

Below are a few of my favorite shots from the field tests. Note that I actually captured quite a few more, but just didn’t have time to process them all before the review went live. Click the images for a larger version. 

 

Please tell others about this post:
This entry was posted in Nikon Gear, Reviews, Techniques, Using Your Gear, Wildlife.

Leave a Reply

33 Comments on "Nikon 500 PF Review"

avatar
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
John
Guest

Steve, one feature that you left out that I saw in another review. There is a tripod screw socket under the tripod foot when removed. I use a shoulder strap, like Black Rapid, to carry my 300 f4E and will carry my 500 f5.6E the same way. Kind of a nice feature for those of us using shoulder straps.

Robert
Guest

Steve, another great video. Keep them comin’. My 500 PF is on order and hope to have it soon. I’m concerned over the “foot” issue. Be interested in hearing from others regarding the best solution. Does adding a plate alleviate the risk of disengaging that Steve mentioned or is a foot like that from Kirk or RRS a better solution.

peanut
Guest
Hi Steve, just got you wildlife book. You were right, if you just pick up a few tips its work the price of the book. And I used a tip you had, and it was worth it. My question, what is your thoughts when you compare the sharpness of the 500pf and the 600 F4. I am using the 600 F4 and I enjoy seeing the barbs on the feathers of a bird. Will I still see that on the 500PF? I want to use the 500pf for quick moving subjects where the tripod is sometimes more difficult to manage,… Read more »
Jamie Baker
Guest
Excellent review as always! I’ve owned the lens since day one and have shot a couple thousand photos with it. It’s an absolute game changer for me. It’s so portable, I can carry it for many hours over miles, no problem at all. I shoot almost exclusively birds, and this lens is so sharp, so easy to carry, and paired with a D500 I don’t think theres a better set up for birders. I sold my 300 PF to help fund the purchase, but I’m hanging on to my 500 f/4 for the moment but will probably sell it too.… Read more »
Bruce
Guest
Outstanding review and provides both charts and real world subjects which is much more informative. I like that such an objective approach was taken in comparing this lens to alternatives. I received mine in October through the NPS program and have also found that I do not hesitate to grab the lens for a hike. I looked into replacement feet from RRS and Kirk but they share the same shortcoming of the stock foot, they do not extend pass the vertical section of the foot. I mounted a P-20 plate and as with what you did Steve it extends about… Read more »
Bill Dewey
Guest

Bruce, I find the same with the Kirk foot on a Gimbal mount. I shoot with a D500 and grip, the combination is slightly rear heavy even when pushed as far forward as possible. If there was just another inch on the back end it would be much easier to balance.

Bruce
Guest

The Wimberley P-20 plate is only 3.9 inches long but it fastens with 2 screws into the Nikon OEM foot and I have mine set so it extends 3/4 inch past rear of the foot and this works quite well. It seems much better to be able to adjust the mounting of the foot to the head as best suits you and a foot alone cannot provide this capability.

William Falls
Guest

Hi Steve. Fantastic photos, you’re a real master.

Bill Dewey
Guest
Steve, I have had my 500PF for a couple of weeks now and totally agree with your review. My Kirk foot arrived today and it is better but not perfect. Much more difficult to actually release the foot. I am going to contact Kirk and suggest that they put a more positive lock out in place as well. For reference, I have the older 600mm f4 VR as well as the 300PF and the 200-500, so it was great seeing your comparisons. The one other crazy test I tried was using the 1.7 TC, and much to my surprise it… Read more »
Greg Gorter
Guest
Hi Steve An outstanding review mate on this lens. I thoroughly enjoyed your in-depth thoughts. I use the 200-500mm on a D500 quite a bit and whilst I find this a reasonably good lens, the keeper rate on shots can be quite low at times. I have found the 200-500mm not as good in low light, it really needs a brighter day to get some wildlife shots nailed. And at 200-300mm as well as at the near end, 480-500mm range it doesn’t perform nearly as well, even though its been properly calibrated. For the 200-500mm I found the optimal to… Read more »
Terry Wahlen
Guest
Another fantastic review – you nailed it once again Mr. P! The 500 PF certainly looks like a beautiful lens, and your comprehensive review will be an invaluable aid when people are deciding on a telephoto. I’ve purchased all of your e-book and video offerings, and am constantly using the techniques you teach when out and about with my D750 and 200-500. Of course, I’d love to own the 600 f/4 but the price here in Australia is over $17,000 – certainly not an option for my limited budget. Regarding the recent (mostly typo) updates to the Secrets To The… Read more »
CHRISTIAN SOMMEILLIER
Guest
CHRISTIAN SOMMEILLIER

Thank’s a lot Steve for your excellent review; most of the time, I use my D500 and 300 F/4 +TC -14E III for small birds photography; handling is a charm and I don’t need a tripod; for better sharpness and long shots, I will certainly use the 500 F/5.6 and keep the 300 alone for birds in flight, the best of both worlds for me.

Wendy
Guest

Have been seriously looking at the 500 PF so very much appreciate your taking the time to not only review it but compare it to the 300 PF +/- 1.4 TC and 200-500. For me the 200-500 is too heavy to hand hold and travel with and the zoom difficult to adjust. I find myself either going with the 80-400 or the 300 PF with a 1.4 attached to either the d500 or d850. Have learned much from both your books and recent NR video. Looking forward to your exposure book.

Bob
Guest

Wendy. I’m in the same situation as I own the 80-400 and find it to be a very good lens. However, I’m considering the 500pf. Using a TC with my current lens is a solution but becomes limiting in lower lighting conditions. I’m probably at a minority but I don’t see the issues when going one level higher in ISO given the capabilities of the D850. Just curious why you are considering this lens given what you have?

Wendy
Guest
I have only used the 1.4 TC with the 300 PF f/4 lens. Have not used it with the 80-400 due to f/8, potential focusing issues and higher ISO. The 80-400 has served me well but looking for more reach for birds and distant wildlife. I have used the 200-500 with good results shooting youth baseball from outfield into home plate. But have yet to use the 200-500 on a trip since for me it is cumbersome to zoom and heavy to handhold. As an enthusiast, the expense of the new 500 is hard to justify, but I would use… Read more »
Callie de Wet
Guest

Excellent review, Steve, thanks, Appreciate
Sold the 600 F/4 (5090g) and all its appurtenances. We shoot mostly from inside vehicles in South Africa so the 600 is a pain wrt maneuverability inside a car. The 500 F/5.6 is as easy and light weight to handle as the 80-400 which replaced my 70-200 f2.8 and 2xTX III.

Darrell Wilt
Guest

Thanks Steve! Your overview of the 500pf was very helpful and I appreciate the many tests you do to provide solid information about its performance!

Bruce Patton
Guest
Steve, Great, informative review as always. I really appreciate everything you do. I cuurently use a two camera system, Nikon and Olympus (paired with the 300mm f4, weights just over 3 lbs., and camera about 1 lb., and 1.4 TC for 840 FOV at f5.6) and I’m not sure the 500PF offers anything I can’t get with my current setup. I do have two questions. One, is there a sharpness increase, and if so, how much, with this lens by stopping down both with and without the TC. I’m hoping the answer is no, or minimal. ;-). Secondly, on your… Read more »
Eric
Guest

Thx you. A very good review indeed. i own it myself and i have the 500/4E and the 200-500;
for now i look to replace the 500/4 for the 600/4E and sell the 200-500VR also. all three 500mm lenses did not makes sense of course

i was missing only one thing in your review: this lens is a little bit sensitive for backlit conditions, so my short experience untill now.

ben
Guest

Sensitive to backlit subjects? i cannot agree with you about this. Compared to me 300 f/4D, the 500 pf is worlds better, I dont have any experience with any big primes though, so maybe you’re right, but from my experience its very very good in this regard.

Eric Bowles
Guest
Steve – Another excellent review and discussion of the pros and cons of the 500 f/5.6 PF and the alternatives. I’m really glad you mentioned out of focus backgrounds since that’s probably more important than the pure sharpness comparisons for me. I don’t own the lens yet, but from a size standpoint, it is very similar to the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 – and that means this lens travels incredibly well either for a hike or for air travel. I came to the same conclusion you did. There is a place for this lens in addition to my 600 f/4. Probably… Read more »
Venkatesh VT VT
Guest

Very informative Video.Your in depth impartial analysis is what every one requires.

FPD Cotterill
Guest
Hi Steve, Well, I checked your site earlier today…. and now I see your promised review is here! On first read, the advantage over the 300 PF comes across clearly, and your comparisons confirm my field tests with D850 and Z7 over the past 1+ month. AS you so rightly say, this 500 PF will not replace any of my lenses, the 400 f2.8E FL especially. But for its ergonimics are a boon in hiking over distance and/or in rougher country. As to zoom advantage of the very good 200-500 Nikkor, I prefer the 70-200 f2.8E FL (to the latter):… Read more »