Bring it on

[tommiejeep]

https://www.dpreview.com/news/7758816413/nikon-developing-compact-and-lightweight-500mm-f5-6-lens
I am negotiating the sale of my 500 f4G vr because the rig is just to heavy for me these days when my birding locations are disappearing.   I use the D500, 300 2.8G vr with tcs very often.  Smaller and lighter would be good and might finally buy D850 (or another D750).
What do people think?
Cheers,

[Akira]

The current PF 300/4.0 will be 510/6.8 with the added 1.7xTC, and the combo should be significantly smaller, lighter and cheaper than the announced PF 500/5.6 (given the size, weight and price of Canon DO 400/4.0).

Would the choice be tough or easy?   

[tommiejeep]

Akira, I take your point but too little information at this point.  FWIW at TC 1.4 on the new lens mounted on a high iso camera at f8 could be nice .  Many things need to be seen to make a decision.  Early days...
Cheers,
Tom

[Roland Vink]

A 500/5.6 lens has an entrance pupil (front element) of 89.3mm. That is about mid way the 300/4 at 75mm and 300/2.8mm at 107mm. I guess the new lens will be about the same size as the AFS 300/2.8, but with a slimmer profile.

The price of these big telephotos is roughly proportional to the size of the front element, 300/4 PF costs about $2000, the AFS 300/2.8 is about $5500, so I would expect a price in the region of $3500 - $4000. That is less than half the price of the AFS 500/4, but hardly a cheap lens. The price to pay for half a stop more speed over the 300/4 + TC17...

[Akira]

FWIW, here is the patent for the PF 500/5.6:

https://nikonrumors.com/2018/02/01/the-latest-nikon-patents-400mm-500mm-and-600mm-f-5-6-phase-fresnel-pf-lenses.aspx/

Allegedly, the length of the lens is 280mm.  It is nearly twice as long as the current PF 300/4.0 (147.5mm) and a little longer than the 200-500-5.6 zoom (267.5mm).

[Ilkka Nissilä]

The length given in patents includes the distance to sensor so the actual lens is likely to be shorter than that.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

The price to pay for half a stop more speed over the 300/4 + TC17...

I would expect a number of advantages.

With TCs the autofocus gets progressively worse as the TC power increases. I would expect significantly better AF from a prime 500mm f/5.6 than a 300/4 PF with TCs or the 200-500/5.6.

The 200-500 is quite good from 200mm to 400mm but in the outer areas of the frame (outside DX area) the 300mm PF is clearly sharper than the 200-500 at 300mm. The zoom loses some sharpness going to 500mm (compared to shorter focal lengths) whereas I would expect comparable sharpness from the 500/5.6 PF wide open as we get from the 300mm PF. Longitudinal chromatic aberration is likely to be well corrected.

Because there is only one Nikon PF lens so far, guessing what the 500 PF will weigh has to have wide margins of error. A conventional ED 500/4 is about 3.9kg, halving that weight to get the smaller maximum aperture makes us at 2 kg but then there is the PF factor which can reduce weight by 30%. I think maybe 1.4kg would be realistic. This would make it substantially lighter and more pleasant to handle than the 200-500/5.6 at 2.3kg.

The 300 PF images can look a bit drab on cloudy, dim days and in such circumstances I prefer conventional refractive optics. I am the most pleased with the 300 PF's handling of bright conditions and coloured, textured subjects. However, in soft low light I would like to have a 300/2.8. Even though the 300 PF has shortcomings I have taken shots I could not have with heavier lenses, just because it's so easy to walk around and shoot with the 300 PF and the autofocus is quite fast and accurate (with no TC). I would expect the 500 PF to be similarly fun to use but the AF may be a bit less good than with the 300. Multi-CAM 20k supports 45 cross points with f/5.6 lenses instead of 99 one gets when using the 300/4 PF. Of course an f/5.6 lens lets in less light so the ISO will have to go up in many circumstances. I guess it is a bright outdoor light lens mostly, where it comes to photographs of moving subjects at least.  But I would expect that people would enjoy shooting with a travel friendly high quality long lens for various reasons.

[chambeshi]

A 500/5.6 lens has an entrance pupil (front element) of 89.3mm. That is about mid way the 300/4 at 75mm and 300/2.8mm at 107mm. I guess the new lens will be about the same size as the AFS 300/2.8, but with a slimmer profile.

The price of these big telephotos is roughly proportional to the size of the front element, 300/4 PF costs about $2000, the AFS 300/2.8 is about $5500, so I would expect a price in the region of $3500 - $4000. That is less than half the price of the AFS 500/4, but hardly a cheap lens. The price to pay for half a stop more speed over the 300/4 + TC17...

Disappointing. A  500 f5.6 falls short for extending with TCs, especially as most birders need 600+ in anycase.

Presumably, Nikon must see a major part of potential sales in travelling outdoor photographers - birders especially. If it is expensive, this group will stay with the 200-500 f5.6 Nikkor and 3rd party zooms to afford a telephoto of 500mm.

It's impossible to guess what this prime will cost to get 1/2 stop faster over the 300 f4E PF + TC17 II. Arguably, the IQ of this 500 PF will have to be significantly better to sell. But 600 f5.6 PF can get around the lower Teleconverter Factor - well sort of. Conversely, the potential with TCs would make a 400 f4 (400 f3.3 being optimum on TCF) or 500 f4 PF far more attractive, but perhaps Nikon envisage that such a lens (if feasible) underming sales of the exotic models. Arguably, an affordable 400 f4 or 500 f4 PF would sell well - as does the 300 PF. Bottom line... a 400 f4 PF + TC14 = 560 f5.6

Early days - let's see the final specs of this 500 f5.6 and its price