Should You Buy a Used 500mm f4? Or Go Modern With the Z 180‑600? A Real‑World Comparison

Super‑telephoto lenses are often the biggest investment a photographer can make. They sit at the top of every manufacturer’s price list, with fast prime lenses easily climbing past 10,000 USD. That eye‑watering cost pushes many photographers toward more budget‑friendly zooms or, as in my case, into the used market. The price gap between the latest fast primes and their second‑hand predecessors is enormous - but it raises an important question: why consider the big primes at all?

These lenses are legendary for a reason. Their mix of microcontrast, subject isolation, and background compression gives images a distinctive, almost sculpted look. Photographers often talk about a certain “magic” in their rendering - something hard to define yet immediately visible. On top of that, fast primes offer one or two extra stops of light that affordable zooms simply can’t match. It may not sound like much on paper, but in deep forests or during the low‑light hours of dawn and dusk, that single stop can be the difference between ISO 6400 - perfectly usable with modern noise‑reduction tools - and ISO 12800.

If you’ve been debating whether to pick up an older exotic prime or go for a modern zoom, this comparison will help you weigh the pros and cons.

Why Compare Used Super‑Telephoto Primes to Modern Zooms

Used G‑type super‑telephoto lenses for the F‑mount - like the 500mm f/4G or 600mm f/4G - now sell for prices surprisingly close to a brand‑new Z‑mount 180–600mm or the 400mm f/4.5. Meanwhile, the newer E‑type primes sit in the same price bracket as Nikon’s PF super‑telephoto lineup (600mm and 800mm). Naturally, this leads to the big question: which option is actually better?

To answer that, we need to break things down by use case, lens characteristics, and - for many of us - how well each option performs for hybrid shooting.

The Lenses I Tested: Nikon AF-S 500mm f/4G ED VR, Nikon Z 100‑400mm f/4.5-5.6 VR S, Nikon Z 180‑600mm f/5.6-6.3 VR

I own the Nikon AF‑S 500mm f/4G ED VR, the Nikon Z 100–400mm f/4.5–5.6 VR S, and the Nikon Z 180–600mm f/5.6–6.3 VR, and I’ve used all of them extensively for both photography and videography. The first and most obvious difference between them is size and weight. Modern Z‑mount lenses use improved materials and optical designs to reduce weight, improve balance, and make them far more ergonomic.

Here are a few sample images for the 180-600mm and the 100-400mm zooms (click the images for a larger view):

Z 100-400mm VR S

Z 100-400mm VR S

Z 100-400mm VR S

Z 180-600mm VR

Z 180-600mm VR

Z 100-400mm VR S

Weight, Handling, and Real‑World Usability

My very first experience with the 500mm was almost dropping the “Beast” while taking it off my video head. It’s so front‑heavy that simply cupping the bottom of the lens with one hand made it tip forward, nearly diving front‑element‑first into the ground. This front‑heavy design also makes handholding the 3,880 g / 8.55 lb Beast a real challenge - and the FTZ adapter doesn’t help, pushing the balance even farther away from the camera body while adding another 110 g / 0.24 lb.

The Z 180–600mm, by comparison, is a lightweight at 2.14 kg / 4.7 lb. More importantly, its ergonomics - button layout, balance, and handling - make it easy to handhold for long periods. Handholding the 500mm, on the other hand, quickly becomes a full‑body workout with plenty of huffing and puffing, followed by letting the lens hang low for “regeneration.” And you can’t take photos or shoot video with the lens dangling upside down from the tripod foot.

In daily use, the 500mm lives on a tripod with a video head. But since the Z9 + FTZ + 500mm combo weighs a whopping 6 kg / 13.22 lb, the tripod and head also need to be chunky enough to support that load. The full setup - camera, lens, tripod, video head - reaches 12 kg / 26.45 lb, which is a lot to carry around, especially on uneven terrain.

Stabilization and Video Performance: Old lens based VR vs Modern IBIS + lens VR

A video head is mandatory with the Beast because its 2009 VR system simply cannot stabilize video. Modern Z‑mount lenses, however, work in tandem with in‑body stabilization, giving up to 6 stops of synchronized VR. In real‑world use, this translates to beautifully stable video that looks like it was shot on a tripod, and a smooth, steady viewfinder experience in photo mode. Older F‑mount lenses can’t synchronize VR with the camera and rely solely on their own lens‑based stabilization.

Another quirk of the 500mm is that even though it has a “Tripod” VR mode, it still tries to correct non‑existent movement, causing micro‑drifting in video. You can literally see the VR moving the image even when the camera is perfectly still. Turning VR off removes the drifting but reveals micro‑jitters caused by pressing buttons or turning dials. The viewfinder is also noticeably more jittery when shooting handheld. The Z‑mount lenses, by contrast, are rock‑steady both handheld and on a tripod, with no micro‑jitters when using camera controls.

Autofocus Noise and Speed in the Field

Autofocus is another area where age shows. The 500mm’s AF motor is fast and accurate, but also loud enough that wildlife might hear it at close distances. The Z‑mount lenses are truly silent while being just as quick and reliable. All of these lenses perform exceptionally for autofocus, the new Z lenses seem to perform better for video though.

Image Quality & Optical Magic: Exotic Prime Rendering vs. Modern Zoom Practicality

Where the old lens absolutely outperforms the modern zooms is image quality. It’s on a different level in sharpness, microcontrast, bokeh, and subject isolation. Color rendering is also more pleasing - it really does produce that “magic” people talk about. For photography alone, the prime would be unbeatable… if flexibility weren’t a factor. This is where modern zooms shine, giving you a plethora of framing options when you can’t move around wildlife.

The zooms are also very consistent throughout their range, though the downside is variable aperture and exposure changes. Price and value are harder to evaluate because usability differs so much. This is why I own both: the prime for low light and subject isolation, and the zooms for handling, flexibility, and video work. My advice is to own both - but if budget forces you to choose, I’d go with the modern zooms.

Here are a few sample images for the 500mm prime (click the images for a larger view):

500mm f/4 prime

500mm f/4 prime

500mm f/4 prime

500mm f/4 prime

500mm f/4 prime

500mm f/4 prime

The Hidden Risk of Buying Used Exotic Lenses: Serviceability and Spare Parts

There’s another important factor: serviceability. At this point, all G‑type and some E‑type F‑mount lenses are out of service. Nikon stopped producing them years ago and no longer provides parts. As I write this, my 500mm is at a Nikon repair center awaiting a repair estimate. The AF motor is acting up after 13 years of use - and who knows how many previous owners or what kind of treatment it endured.

Buying second‑hand always carries the risk of hidden damage or simple wear and tear. But the bigger issue is that Nikon no longer supplies spare parts. I first had to confirm whether the service center could even attempt the repair. Thankfully, these old exotics are valuable enough that third‑party manufacturers still produce major components like AF motors, but you might not be this lucky with every model. Mine also has issues with the rubber coverings simply due to aging materials.

I’ll keep you updated on how the repairs go and how much it costs to get the Beast back into working order. As for the new zooms? Nikon offers a 5‑year warranty where I live, and they’ll be serviceable for a long time after that.

Final Verdict: Which Lens Should You Choose?

After hauling the Beast around forests, fields, and muddy riverbanks, I’ve learned one thing: image quality is great, but it doesn’t help if you’re too tired to shoot after dragging around all the pieces needed to make it work. If you’re a stills shooter only, you might get around this by simplifying your setup to a lightweight carbon monopod instead of a heavy tripod and video head. The 500mm still makes images that feel like magic, but the Z‑mount zooms make images while also letting me walk the distance.

If you want the fairy dust, get the prime. If you want your back to survive, get the zoom. Or do what I did: buy both and use each for its strengths.

In the end, the best lens is the one that helps you make the images you actually want to make - and the one you’re still willing to carry.

What’s Your Take?

Are you still rocking adapted F-mount exotics on your mirrorless bodies, or have you fully committed to native Z glass? Let me know in the comments below—I’d love to hear how you manage the weight out in the field!

Stay Tuned: As I mentioned, my 500mm f/4G is currently sitting at the service center. If you want to know whether Nikon can actually fix it, how much it costs to resurrect an out-of-service exotic lens, and see the side-by-side test images once it's back, subscribe to the blog and our newsletter!