Nikon 200-500mm
Jun 25, 2018 07:19:46 #
ToBoldlyGo
Loc: London U.K.
Largobob wrote:
I disagree with ToBoldlyGo, that the 200-500 has slow focus. I believe that had more to do with his camera body.
I disagree with ToBoldlyGo, that the 200-500 has slow focus. I believe that had more to do with his camera body.
Sorry if I wasn't clear. My intention was to recommend caution for faster moving subjects, not to state the lens is slow. Compared to telephoto primes, it's clearly not as good for focus. It is fast, but few mid range lenses will track birds in flight quite that well. I believe my post does say that camera body has an impact here. However from the OP, I would think that birds in flight doesn't seem to be a high priority, so my experiences can be taken with a pinch of salt. Hope I haven't put you off.
Jun 25, 2018 07:22:35 #
ToBoldlyGo
Loc: London U.K.
Bill_de wrote:
Royce,
Slow focus is relative. It is slower than the 500 F4.0 on both a D4s and a D500, so I don't think the body is the issue. That said, it is by no means a slow lens, just slower than lenses that cost 5-10 times as much.
--
Slow focus is relative. It is slower than the 500 F4.0 on both a D4s and a D500, so I don't think the body is the issue. That said, it is by no means a slow lens, just slower than lenses that cost 5-10 times as much.
--
Yes slow focus is relative, I completely agree. Bear in mind that you are comparing two top end pro bodies though. I noticed a big difference in my photography when I changed bodies, bugs became much easier to keep in focus too.
Jun 25, 2018 07:23:25 #
ToBoldlyGo wrote:
Sorry if I wasn't clear. My intention was to recom... (show quote)
We all have varying opinions with our different cameras, shooting conditions and other factors, so it is good to hear the results of many.Jun 25, 2018 07:23:41 #
I'm sure the 200/500 is a great lens. The prefer the Tamron 150/600 G2, it's lighter with 100mm more reach.
Look at Mike Jackson's Best of the Tetons he has both lens, he prefers the Tammy.
I'm not trying to start a discussion on lens, the Tammy works great on my D500.
Look at Mike Jackson's Best of the Tetons he has both lens, he prefers the Tammy.
I'm not trying to start a discussion on lens, the Tammy works great on my D500.
Jun 25, 2018 07:26:55 #
Jun 25, 2018 07:31:24 #
J-SPEIGHT wrote:
I use it with the D500 and it's a great combo.
I got mine form Nikon web site refurbished. 10% off sale ends today $1099
Here's one of GD from bleachers about midfield.
Jun 25, 2018 07:56:41 #
I have and love the 200-500mm zoom. I am using it on a D500 (crop) camera which gives me extra reach.
It is fast, very sharp, and light.
Hope this helps.
It is fast, very sharp, and light.
Hope this helps.
Jun 25, 2018 08:34:12 #
ToBoldlyGo
Loc: London U.K.
DaveO wrote: We all have varying opinions with our different cameras, shooting conditions and other factors, so it is good to hear the results of many.
We all have varying opinions with our different cameras, shooting conditions and other factors, so it is good to hear the results of many.Thanks. It's so hard sometimes to find relevant info, most other sites are obsessed with technical data and noise and so on. What I rarely find online is anyone saying that a high end camera will handle AF differently to a consumer camera. Again, not relevant to what the OP was asking, but I think it's worth discussing how a certain camera may handle a lens. It's almost like high end audio, when making one change will affect everything else, and make all your music sound better.
Jun 25, 2018 08:37:54 #
I have a Sigma 150-600C and love it. Bought it used and it is excellent. I can hand hold perfect shots. I would but it again.
Jun 25, 2018 08:38:11 #
I have a Sigma 150-600C and love it. Bought it used and it is excellent. I can hand hold perfect shots. I would but it again.
Jun 25, 2018 08:42:04 #
I have the 300mm PF + TC1.4 and find the combination very sharp and lightweight - the TC is pretty much glued to the lens and I have auto-tuned the lens with and without the TC.
The disadvantage of the 300mm PF + TC1.4 combo is flexibility - it is galling if you want to zoom out and can only do so to 420mm before swapping out the TC. I tested a 200-500 in a shop but found it far heavier in comparison - perhaps with a monopod or gimbal it would work better - just more gear and weight to carry though.
It really depends on what you are shooting - do you frequently need to zoom in or out or not? I find for distant birds, e.g. at a migratory lake the 300mm PF+ TC1.4 combo works well and you can shoot for hours with little fatigue. When shooting birds of prey at a couple of festivals the combo worked less well for me as they swoop in and out. On a safari, I'm guessing the wildlife is mostly distant so less zooming; at a zoo animals can be both near and far so you need a zoom (or a second camera with a 70-200mm).
The disadvantage of the 300mm PF + TC1.4 combo is flexibility - it is galling if you want to zoom out and can only do so to 420mm before swapping out the TC. I tested a 200-500 in a shop but found it far heavier in comparison - perhaps with a monopod or gimbal it would work better - just more gear and weight to carry though.
It really depends on what you are shooting - do you frequently need to zoom in or out or not? I find for distant birds, e.g. at a migratory lake the 300mm PF+ TC1.4 combo works well and you can shoot for hours with little fatigue. When shooting birds of prey at a couple of festivals the combo worked less well for me as they swoop in and out. On a safari, I'm guessing the wildlife is mostly distant so less zooming; at a zoo animals can be both near and far so you need a zoom (or a second camera with a 70-200mm).
Jun 25, 2018 09:12:13 #
ToBoldlyGo wrote:
Yes slow focus is relative, I completely agree. Bear in mind that you are comparing two top end pro bodies though. I noticed a big difference in my photography when I changed bodies, bugs became much easier to keep in focus too.
My point was that the 200-500 was slower than the 500 prime on both cameras. That indicated it was the lens and not the cameras.
I would think that while an entry level camera might cause the lenses to focus slower you would still see a difference between the prime and the somewhat slower zoom.
---
Jun 25, 2018 09:38:38 #
Bazbo
Loc: Lisboa, Portugal
Royce Moss wrote:
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been lo... (show quote)
I love this lens but keep in mind it is heavy. I would invest in a gimbal tripod head.
Overall, it is the best lens in this local length for the money on the market today.
Jun 25, 2018 09:54:55 #
Took it to Kenya and got some great shots with a Nikon 850. I struggled to take flying birds, it is a little slow. A few shots were out of focus or soft at the edges and unusable. Some of that is on me, not the lens. If you are going to publish posters, maybe it isn’t the lens for you, but I am very happy with the quality and price. The lions were shot at about 150 ft in raw and minimally cropped. It is representative of some of the limits given the softness at high resolution.
Jun 25, 2018 09:58:06 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.