[Klaus]

https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/porta...is-iii-usm

[JJ_SO]

Nice, but way out of my reach/league. I'd prefer the lighter and cheaper 500/5.6 Nikon.

[Brightcolours]

Yeah, the Nikkor is attractively priced for sure. The Canon Ef 400mm f4 DO IS USM II is priced quite a bit higher, and then you still have to get a 1.4x TC to get to 560mm.

[JJ_SO]

The quality of the Canon for sure is better, not to mention the bokeh and lowlight capabilities - but a good sensor can compensate the lack of speedy apertue of the Nikkor to a degree.

[Rover]

Guess you're not going to test it Klaus...

Though I wager testing the brand name big superteles is kind of pointless anyway - at that price point they should be (and probably are) perfect from the get go. The more affordable alternatives are a different story - but they're exponentially harder to procure.

I remember Markus did test a Nikon 200/2 but I think he only did this because he was renting / owning this lens at the time so it was kind of easy to run it through the lab...

[JJ_SO]

Are you going to "probably considerig to buy it in the very far future", Rover?   The very few people who can afford and are willing to carry this kind of optics will most likely rent one and the decide if it suits their needs. I think it's hard to make a rig stable enough to test these things - and the usual test parameters might be useless if it has a) slow AF or b) issues with WR or c) can't take a bump.

Roie Galitz took the new Nikon 500/5.6 PF with him to Kamtchatka to compare it with his 500/4. See also https://www.dpreview.com/articles/388997...-kamchatka

Take away from the essay was, although he liked and welcame the low weight, he prefers having one stop more and get the shot at dawn or sunset.

[Rover]

Are you going to "probably considerig to buy it in the very far future", Rover?   The very few people who can afford and are willing to carry this kind of optics will most likely rent one and the decide if it suits their needs. I think it's hard to make a rig stable enough to test these things - and the usual test parameters might be useless if it has a) slow AF or b) issues with WR or c) can't take a bump.

Roie Galitz took the new Nikon 500/5.6 PF with him to Kamtchatka to compare it with his 500/4. See also https://www.dpreview.com/articles/388997...-kamchatka

Take away from the essay was, although he liked and welcame the low weight, he prefers having one stop more and get the shot at dawn or sunset.

No, not in a million years. Even if I had had the money I'd never consider dropping so much down this hole. I'd be better off with a 100-400/4.5-5.6 lens (a specimen of which I incidentally have) and a round-the-world trip behind my belt. Besides, the onset of arthritis means I'd better start planning to get rid of the heavy gears I already have, not buy some more of the bricks.
I've read that article about Kamchatka. Funny that me and my wife were once considering a vacation there but the high price turned us off this. Apparently there's no bonus to being a citizen of the same country - if you're a tourist, they're gonna milk you but good.