RE: Nikon 500mm f/4D AF-s Version I

[BruceLeventhal]

Hello,

I am seeking a bit of collective feedback regarding the first AF-s iteration of the 500mm f/4 lens. I am in the market for a 500mm f/4. The lens would be used exclusively with a tripod, as I have other VR options for those times when I can not shoot from a tripod or will be tracking erratic subjects. While I have a D810 and D610, the lens would be used with one of my D500's. Were I to own a D4 or D5 I would not be concerned with the sharpness, but the high pixel density of the D500 and D810 really seems to tax some of the older lenses.

For the right price and in the right condition ($2500US in EX+), do you think the lens will deliver high quality and contrasty images with my intended camera. Just to be clear, the 500mmG is out of budget at $4000-$5000 and the FLE would likely lead to a divorce 

cheers,
bruce

[bobfriedman]

my 500/4G VR would likely fetch only $3500 USD and it is in great condition and i would be willing to sell it.  it is sharp as a tack and much better than its predecessor - so you may look around for some private sales.. i know the dealers are only giving $3000 USD for this lens.

[BruceLeventhal]

Thanks Bob...
I appreciate the information... $3500 is a better price than I have seen previously. I know that the E lens is better, it is surprising to hear the degree to which the price of the G lens has dropped...

However,... I shouldn't be too shocked, as the resale value my 200-400VR has plummeted. I recently saw one for sale on Fred Miranda for $1800... At this point, I have decided to keep my 200-400 and am looking to supplement it with longer glass for when I need it.

regards,
bruce

[Ilkka Nissilä]

my 500/4G VR would likely fetch only $3500 USD and it is in great condition and i would be willing to sell it.  it is sharp as a tack and much better than its predecessor - so you may look around for some private sales.. i know the dealers are only giving $3000 USD for this lens.

4500-5700€ has been the price range of prices of used VR 500/4G in Europe that I've seen (privately a bit less than prices that dealers ask). Of course a dealer will pay less than they ask for it since they want to make a profit.

[MILLIREHM]

Just my 2 cents:
There are actually four AF-S  Versions of the 500/4 (not 2)
The AF-S I D-Version
The AF-S II D-Version
The AF-S G-Version (with VR)
The AF-S E-Version (with VR) (added: and with the new Fluorite elements of course)

I have got the AF-S I Version and never saw a reason to "upgrade". VR ist definitely not a "must have". On my lenses with VR I mostly turn it off.
Never used the 500 with the newest cameras. When I got the 200-400/4 VR I found that the 200-400 and the 500 are too close in focal length and the 600/4 would make a  better couple. I  upgraded then.

[Roland Vink]

I will also add, the first two AF-S versions are optically the same, only the barrel was revised with the II version being a little lighter and focusing a little closer. The other versions are different, due to the addition of VR, and then the addition of a Fluorite element to the lens design.
You can compare the specs of all versions here: http://photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/specs.html#500

Nikon super-telephoto lenses have always been made to the highest standards, and all should perform well on the D500 and D810. The newer models are a little better, and the VR versions also have Nano Crystal Coating so the colours and contrast should be better when shooting into strong light, but in absolute terms there is little to separate them.

[longzoom]

If VR is not an option, then the older  Sigma 500/4.5 APO is equal or even better a little bit. Sharper wide open,  with belter  contrast, very low degrades with TC 1.4,  in my own experience.  If it is possible, just try both. Good luck, in any case!  LZ

[BruceLeventhal]

Thanks to everyone who has responded.
I am a big fan of my 200-400VR and am well aware of its strengths and weaknesses.
The 500mm series is a black box for me. I know photographers who shoot with the 400mm f2.8 FLE and 600mm f/4 AF-sII (nonVR). These shooters love their lenses, but I find the size a bit daunting. The 500's seem small enough for longish hikes, but I want to be sure that I add a sharp optic to the kit.

Regarding the Sigma 500mm f/4.5... well there is a used one at my local camera store for $1650. The lens is part of the last design with EX/DG coating and the smooth (non-crinkle) barrel coating. I have hunted for high res images made with the lens, but had not found anything that suggests it comes close to the Nikon equivalent optic. If someone could show me detail-rich pics shot in low light with the Sigma, I would consider this lens as well.
thanks and regards,
bruce

[Roland Vink]

Any chance you can take a few test shots with the Sigma? Even if it's just shooting out their front door, that would tell you a lot more than anything else in terms of optical quality, AF speed and accuracy, and general handling.

According to some reviews the newest Sigma 500/4 is a close match for the 500 FL VR, cheaper but heavier. The Sigma 500/4.5 is an older design, before Sigma upped their game with their new "Art" lenses. My guess (and it's only a guess) is that it is good but not at the level of the Nikons. Older Sigmas also had a lot of compatibility issues over the years, so it would pay to try it on your camera before you buy.

It might also be worth looking at the Nikon 200-500/5.6 and the Tamron and Sigma 150-600 super zooms, I heard good things about them, although none will perform as well at 500mm as the 500/4 primes.

[BruceLeventhal]

Roland,
I have used the Sigma 500mm f/4 Sport... in fact, I was on a trip with Brad Hill who famously compared the 500mm FLE to the Sigma Sport. He was using the sport for almost all of his long tele work. I was working with my 200-400VR and 300mm pf and he offered his lens to for a few hours. The Sigma is a super lens, well balance, reasonably light and made as well as any Nikon lens I have owned. In fact, my experience with his lens led to my decision to purchase the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 ART lens.

My perception of the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 matches your suspicions, and it is the reason that the lens has not been on my list. At this point, I will probably pass on the 500mm f/4 AF-s vI and wait until I can afford a 500G or the Sigma Sport. Truth be told... I want the 180-400mm f/4 w/ built in 1.4x, but that lens is not even close to what I can afford. As for the 200-500VR... well, my wife uses this lens and it is a fine optic. Were it built like my 200-400VR and had the AFS motor of a pro lens, I would consider this to be a viable option. However, I live in Minnesota where weather extremes is no cliche and I travel to some pretty weather intensive locations. As such, I require the build of a pro lens that has decent weather sealing.

cheers,
bruce