With the teleconverters, I can cover every focal length from 80-1200mms with good overlap in the moderate telephoto ranges. I even can handle most wide-angle situations.

Lets consider what I have with a 500mm f/4 AF-S.

500mm f/4 AF-S
80-200mm f/2.8 AF-S
18-35mm f/3.5-4.5
14mm f/2.8
TC-14e and TC-20
I still have my 300mm f/2.8 AF-S in the car.

The difference now is the longest lens combo is only 1000mms. While this doesnt seem like much it is if image size is super important like I mentioned earlier; every millimeter becomes critical.

On the other hand, traveling with the 600mm f/4 AF-S over your shoulder is a bear. No question its a pain. After a whole day walking around shooting, youre hunched over sore as heck and looking for a hot bath to soak in. The 500mm f/4 on the other hand is a hikers lens if there could be such a thing. If mobility is important to you, it may be the most overriding requirement in this decision process--600mm lenses need not apply.

One last thing about the 500mm f/4 AF-Ss size. Its about 3 inches shorter than the 600mm f/4 AF-S which can be extremely important when traveling between nature photography destinations. Many photographers use LowePro camera backpacks to transport their gear. The largest are barely within airline guidelines for carry-on baggage and may or may not pass airport attendant scrutiny in todays heightened security environment. The 600mm f/4 AF-S barely fits within these bags and doesnt allow much for extra equipment. A colleague of mine suffered severe damage to his 600mm lens through airline negligence. Could this have been prevented if he used a slightly smaller and less cramped 500mm lens? Possibly&

After all this youre finally asking me to get to the point. What do you do? When Im at home using my truck, I bring my 600mm f/4 AF-S on every trip. The lens may never come out of its camera bag on those trips but Ive got it just in case. When Im on the road using the airlines, I pack my 500mm f/4 AF-S in a Pelican Case. This gets packed into a duffle bag along with all my other soft camera equipment like my Kinesis Gear camera belt. I may loose a little on the long magnification end but my stress level is much lower having eliminated most concerns about travel related damage to my lenses. Recently, Ive even taken to using my 500mm f/4 less and less on airline road trips since going digital 18 months ago. The Nikon digital SLRs apparent 1.5x magnification makes my 300mm f/2.8 AF-S act like a 450mm f/2.8 AF-S lens. This is awfully close to my 500mm f/4 AF-S capability with regular 35mm film. I struggled before a recent trip to Jasper NP on whether to bring the 500mm lens or not. Eventually I chose not to simply because I wanted to lighten my overall load. Did I miss the lens? Only once and that opportunity was fleeting. Otherwise, my 300mm f/2.8 AF-S with teleconverters easily fit the bill.

If youre struggling weighing the merits of a 500mm verses 600mm lens as your next major purchase, I hope this article has explained things a bit and eased your problem. The point is if magnification is important, the 600mm f/4 AF-S is the way to go. If you still need long lens reach but plan on moving from location to location using your own feet, the 500mm f/4 AF-S is probably the choice.

Cheers

Tom Hill