NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: Airy on February 27, 2022, 19:10:28
-
I got this lens as a gift, from a colleague who went onto retirement and moved towards the Atlantic coastline. I'm staying in old North and away from the sea.
The 500C I got is in pristine condition. It makes a better impression than the later 500N, but is bigger and does not focus as close.
Here are a few shots from this morning, all shot at f/8 of course, and 1/1000s. ISO was relatively high.
It is difficult to get a squirrel picture sharp, once you got it in focus, it has already moved and never stops moving anyway.
The parakeet shot is by itself uninteresting, but I observed they were mad at squirrels, probably because of egg theft [threat].
The brickwall shot is even more uninteresting, but those bricks are legacy from military engineer Vauban, who inspired many others. Vignetting is not very high, but constrast is relatively low, as usual with mirror lenses. The 500N is somewhat better I think, but I did not compare them so far.
-
I have a Reflex-Nikkor 500mm/8 C, but contrary to you I find vignetting to be rather severe on a full frame camera. I find it acceptable on a DX camera.
My sample is heavily tattoed on the metal with the data from previous proprietors (including an astronomy club), but lenses and mirrors are perfect.
Focussing is critical but your ability will expand the more you use the lens.
I have the N version too, much less vignetting, and it focusses to 1.5m instead of 4 m. With such a short minimum distance, it can be used as a "macro" lens for shy or dangerous animals (lizards, snakes, ...) I have chipped this one so the EXIFs are fully covered. To prevent flaring, I have adapted in addition to the very short original hood (only 30 mm depth, useless), with a 82 to 86 ring adapter, a hood from a Zeiss Tele-Tessar 500mm (for the Hasselblad 500 series). I remove the big hood (120 mm in all) for candid photography.
Ciao from Massimo
-
Great shots, Airy.
I have the same experience with the Reflex's. Images with the older 500/8 were much crisper than with the later N version. My sample had no problems with vignetting on a FX, Massimo.
Images are rather 'dull' with the N version despite (or perhaps because) the ability to focus closer)
-
Massimo, your comments made me wonder about the vignetting. I just checked if any PP were applied - that's not the case, NX Studio did not apply any lens profile, and the pics look the same when displayed via M$ Photo. Needless to say, the pics above were not cropped.
John, I'll check the two (C and N versions) side-by-side. My gut feeling is that the N is sharper, but as I do not use those lenses very often, I may have fooled myself in believing that.
-
I was able to buy a 500 N reflex quite cheaply a few years ago. I like it for the ability to focus close and for the amazing focus throw - nearly 540 degrees with no resistance at all. I don't see too much vignetting on a full-frame camera. I'm interested to hear that the older 'C' version produces crisper images. I wouldn't call anything I've produced with the 'N' crisp, but provided you're careful with backgrounds it can yield quite nice images that don't need too much work to enhance the contrast in Photoshop. I've attached a few from way back in autumn 2019 - the first two show a bit of the background character (all taken on a tripod to keep ISO low).
Cheers, John
-
Here are some samples taken with the Reflex-Nikkor 500/8 N and a full frame camera (D600).
Photo 1: St.Rémy de Provence, not far from Van Gogh's psychiatric hospital
Photo 2: Counting feathers from about 20 m distance
Photo 3: A resting greyhound
Photo 4: Laguna di Venezia
Photo 5: A beautiful Japanese tourist in Venezia
The N version does not look that bad -or dull- after all. As a matter of fact, I almost immediately abandoned the 500/8 C as soon as I put my hands on my sample of the 500/8 N ... and saw the results. It could well be that my sample of the 500 C was real bad and the opposite was true of the 500 N (no vignetting at all, even on FF)
Ciao from Massimo
-
The very first image is lovely. Envy your steady hands. ::)
-
This story about the development of the 500/8 (new) shows how this lens should have better contrast than the older type:
https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0013/index.htm
The hole bored through the primary mirror means stray light is reflected away from the image plane:
(https://imaging.nikon.com/history/story/0013/img/img6.jpg)
-
The very first image is lovely. Envy your steady hands. ::)
Thanks Akira! The relatively short length and its low weight (for a 500 mm: only 840 g) do help in having a steady hand. I still have to test it with my new Zfc, focussing is going to be easier than with a traditional Nikon D. All included the Zfc+FTZ+500N/8 = 445+135+840 = 1420 g, less than the weight of the 500/5.6 PF alone! (1460 g)
Ciao from Massimo
-
I love my ‘new’ 500, especially with a 1.4 TC.
Has anyone actually verified if it is still ‘necessary’ to have a filter in place for the lens to function correctly (apart from when a TC is used)?
Of course the lens functions correctly … What I mean is - is image quality effected by its absence?
-
Thanks Akira! The relatively short length and its low weight (for a 500 mm: only 840 g) do help in having a steady hand. I still have to test it with my new Zfc, focussing is going to be easier than with a traditional Nikon D. All included the Zfc+FTZ+500N/8 = 445+135+840 = 1420 g, less than the weight of the 500/5.6 PF alone! (1460 g)
Ciao from Massimo
Massimo, I'm sorry to have confused you. The poppy image is lovely, for sure, but I originally referred to the first image of Airy's initial post...
-
Here showing what I mean by vignetting on the 500/8 C (on a full frame), it's particularly evident if you have thumbnails side-by-side with subjects on a uniform background.
There is not much of a problem if you crop the images, see examples (quarrelling male flamingoes from an outing in Camargue).
The heavier weight of the 500/8 C (1000 grams) vs the 500/8 N (840 grams) usually see me opting for the N version.
With a DX camera vignetting is almost absent, with my trusty D500 I have shot the Moon from all angles.
Re: keeping the filter on the lens at all times, I have read somewhere (don't ask me where!) that the filter is part of the optical formula, so it is essential to have one ON at all times (except when a TC is used, of course!). Besides, the filter in place prevents dust from entering the lens, so there is no advantage removing it.
Ciao from Massimo
-
I dug out a sequence with the 500/8 N and a uniform background, there's less vignetting than with the 500 C.
Please note that I get much benefit in harsh sun conditions with my elongated hood, maybe who experienced lack of sharpness has actually had flare in the lens: the front element is exposed to sunlight, and the HN-27 hood is so short (25 mm approximately) to be useless (but it's cylindrical, so you can screw additional HN-27s onto one another).
I opted instead for the HN-27 + Hasselblad hood with 82-86 ring adapter, so a slightly larger diameter does not add to vignetting (actual tests with and without hood confirmed it).
I have also modified the previous thumbnail group to show how DX format would crop out the vignetting.
On a side note, one essential feature of the 39 mm internal filter: it holds the Dandelion chip (glued on with epoxy), there was nothing else to attach the Dande chip, and besides I can remove it (not mount it on another lens, I suppose the 39 mm thread's start is not going to be the same on any two lenses!)
Ciao from Massimo
-
To prevent flaring, I have adapted in addition to the very short original hood (only 30 mm depth, useless), with a 82 to 86 ring adapter, a hood from a Zeiss Tele-Tessar 500mm (for the Hasselblad 500 series).
The HN-10 from the old 85-250 zoom sits nicely on top of the native HN-27 for an additional 4cm.
-
Thanks, Bruno! I had to reverse your technique, I have the 85-250mm but I am missing the HN-10, so I use two HN-27s on the 85-250 (or the Hasselblad hood + ring adapter)
Here are some photos of my setup and size comparison with the Zfc:
Group 1:
The Reflex-Nikkor-N with two stacked HN-27s plus the Hasselblad hood
Lens and elongated hood, separated
The chipped 39-mm filter
Lens, hood, Zfc and lenscap
Group 2:
Lens mounted on Zfc with FTZ
Zfc, FTZ, Reflex-Nikkor and elongated hood
Two views of the camera data, showing that chipped lens is correctly recognised
and then two photos showing the measures and the whole assembly (taken @6.7 mm)
The elongated hood is 120 mm, the camera + lens is 185mm (at ∞, at 1.5 m it's only 10 mm longer)
I used a Nikon 1S2 with Series 1 6.7-13 wideangle lens
Ciao from Massimo
-
What's your experience with image stabilization, when using the 500/8 ?
-
No IBIS in the Zfc, so in this case no stabilization. None in Z50, not sure in Z5 (no IBIS? likely)
Works with Z6/Z6II/Z7/Z7II and I'll assume it works with Z9's IBIS; no stabilization on any Nikon Dxxxx
Being an f:8 lens, it's good for having a lot of reach in good sunlight: very nice for flamingos in Camargue at noon, not so nice for BIF at sunrise/sunset...
Ciao from Massimo
-
Z5 has 5-axis stabilization, therefore is a "candidate buy" from my side...
-
I also have the 500N. With film the very tricky part was to get 100% exact focus. If focus was hit 100% it can be quite sharp but not as crisp as a "real" tele (e.g. a 300/2.8 + 1.4x TC).
I have not tried it yet with Z50.
Is the 500N a lens that can be "chip'ed"?
-
chipped - what for, apart from dialing in the focal length...
-
I also have the 500N. With film the very tricky part was to get 100% exact focus. If focus was hit 100% it can be quite sharp but not as crisp as a "real" tele (e.g. a 300/2.8 + 1.4x TC).
I have not tried it yet with Z50.
Is the 500N a lens that can be "chip'ed"?
It can be chipped, just look at the photos I just posted.
To chip or not to chip? I prefer to chip a lens whenever possible, sometimes it's useless to chip a lens: think of the 50-300/4.5, what value of the focal length are you going to put in the chip's firmware?
In this case it's better to dedicate 2 or 3 adjacent slots of the available non-CPU lens data to save different focal lengths (say 50-150-300 in the specific example), but in that case the number of free slots is going to be depleted quickly (another reason to chip a lens, you free up a slot).
Ciao from Massimo
-
My reason for "chip" was to enable the focus points in view finder to turn from red to green when in focus (I know that using 100% view is more accurate). But then you have both options.