Primes vs Telephoto lenses

bandit993

Senior Member
I know that primes are sharper than telephoto lenses but is it that big of a difference? I am looking at a 500mm or 600mm prime. They are older as neither has VR. "D" versions I believe. Here is a pic I took with the 150-600mm Sigma. Just wondering how much sharper it could get...... Thanks
 

Attachments

  • NIK_4698.JPG
    NIK_4698.JPG
    450.1 KB · Views: 166

480sparky

Senior Member
The IQ difference between zooms and primes is getting smaller every day. The advantage to primes are 1: faster (an no variable) maximum aperture, 2: lighter, 3: smaller, 4: usually focus closer and 5: may take smaller filters.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I don't have one of the telephoto zoom lenses like the Sigma, but generally a zoom isn't quite as sharp when it's zoomed all the way out. Usually they work better when pulled back a little--like 580mm rather than all the way out at 600mm. My guess is the prime will be a little sharper, but there would be quite a bit of weight to a 500mm or 600mm prime. Have you considered a 300mm with a teleconverter?
 

bandit993

Senior Member
Hark, I thought about a 300mm pf or the older F4 with a 1.4 or even 2.0 teleconverter but would lose IQ . I wonder how much IQ though?
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Hark, I thought about a 300mm pf or the older F4 with a 1.4 or even 2.0 teleconverter but would lose IQ . I wonder how much IQ though?

I have both the PF and the AF-S (no VR) versions of the 300mm f/4 prime as well as a 1.4x teleconverter. The difference in IQ with the 1.4x teleconverter is very small. I'm pretty sure both of these were taken with the AF-S (non-VR) lens and 1.4x teleconverter earlier this year. The PF weighs a lot less plus since it has VR, it is easy to handle. However, the 300mm f/4 AF-S (non-VR) with a teleconverter will still be far lighter in weight than a 500mm or 600mm prime.

DSC_5202 low res.jpg


DSC_3665 low res.jpg
 

jay_dean

Senior Member
I've had a Nikon 500mm f/4 VR for a few years and used to have the Siggy 150-600mm Sport which i bought on a whim with a bonus i received to cover that missing focal length. Theres not a big gap between them optically tbh, its the speed thats the more noticeable thing. And notice i said 'used to have', just saying;)
 

Ironwood

Senior Member
There is the new Nikon 500 f5.6 PF that will be hitting the shelves soon. I expect it to be a bit out of my price range, but will be cheaper the the 500 f4.
 

bandit993

Senior Member
Thanks mikew. I have both the D7200 and the D500, and I notice both cameras over expose pics. Is that a Nikon thing? I was using the D7200 yesterday taking some pics of leaves and berries and I had to under expose the pic by quite a little to get it to look correct.. Thanks again..
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
Not sure but its often easier to recover underexposed rather than over, with my olympus i tend to use spot metering tied to my focus point.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
Nice capture but some of your detail is lost through blown highlights,with out them it could look even sharper.

Thanks mikew. I have both the D7200 and the D500, and I notice both cameras over expose pics. Is that a Nikon thing? I was using the D7200 yesterday taking some pics of leaves and berries and I had to under expose the pic by quite a little to get it to look correct.. Thanks again..

Not sure but its often easier to recover underexposed rather than over, with my olympus i tend to use spot metering tied to my focus point.

For the types of images I shoot, I found myself overriding the metering far too many times when the camera was in Matrix metering. Now I shoot with center weighted metering. Mike's suggestion of Spot metering is also good. Not sure if Nikon bodies can be set to offer spot metering associated to a single point, but I've never looked into it. Try a different method of metering and see if that helps.
 

10 Gauge

Senior Member
Modern telephoto's are getting quite good, even the more inexpensive ones. The sharpness of the Sigma 150-600 Contemporary I picked up a few years ago is outstanding at a bargain at the cost of entry for such a vast focal range.

Pixel peeping these photo's below @ 600mm should be an eye opener!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kreiphotography/18342886374/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kreiphotography/18576770906/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kreiphotography/17982513923/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/kreiphotography/20230775739/
 

aroy

Senior Member
For the types of images I shoot, I found myself overriding the metering far too many times when the camera was in Matrix metering. Now I shoot with center weighted metering. Mike's suggestion of Spot metering is also good. Not sure if Nikon bodies can be set to offer spot metering associated to a single point, but I've never looked into it. Try a different method of metering and see if that helps.

I regularly shoot with spot metering, single point and AFS. It will meter at which ever focusing point you choose.

I have faced a lot of difficulty with Matrix Metering. In my shots it is always over exposing the reds and blues in bright light, when you look at the Histogram on the computer. For daylight Fill Flash matrix metering works perfectly.
 
Top