Nikon 200-500 issue
Feb 24, 2018 11:41:08 #
I have had mine for 2 years and no problems at all. It is a great lens for the price. Recently took it with me to the Galapagos and got some great images with it.
Feb 24, 2018 11:52:45 #
HHI_Beach_Bum wrote:
I have had mine for 2 years and no problems at all. It is a great lens for the price. Recently took it with me to the Galapagos and got some great images with it.
Some people have all the fun...
Feb 24, 2018 12:05:02 #
Feb 24, 2018 12:42:17 #
Feb 24, 2018 13:04:13 #
Steve Perry wrote:
I had to go through 3 copies before I found a sharp one (I later found that the folks at Photography Life has similar problems). However, this was all when the lens first came out. I really don't see too much anymore about sample variation, it seems like it's pretty safe to buy now. Of course, always test any new lens and make sure it's satisfactory.
I must have got one of your returns :-)
As a refurbished model you only get 90 day warranty. I was busy and wasn't paying attention and let the time lapse.
I had some very unpleasant talks with Nikon until I got sick of the subject. Now the lens is just sitting in my closet taking up space. Someday when I've cooled off I will see about getting it repaired.
Moral of the story- If you buy refurbished equipment from Nikon make haste to test it.
Feb 24, 2018 13:18:03 #
I've had mine for over a year now and no problems at all.
By the way, it was a refurbished model also.
By the way, it was a refurbished model also.
Feb 24, 2018 13:18:58 #
I recently purchased a Sigma 150-600 Contemporary zoom for Nikon and it is totally outstanding and produces sharp contrasty images throughout it's zoom range -I would recommend this one to you!!
Feb 24, 2018 13:47:41 #
Feb 24, 2018 14:51:35 #
ToBoldlyGo
Loc: London U.K.
Keldon wrote:
I'm considering purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. I know that many of them had a quality control/ focus issue when they first came out and was wondering if that issue has ben cleared up. I have heard and read of people sending them back two or three times before getting a good one.
I got mine fairly early on. It was the display copy in Jessops, I was able to have a play and get a small but worthwhile discount on it. I'm still developing my technique with it, I use it hand held with no support. I love birds in flight shots which are a real challenge. For this photo I cheated. It's from my garden, actually through glass. It's a fairly heavy crop, and currently one of my favourite photos. I've tried to attach a couple of other photos, but they're showing as too large, and I'm on my phone with this and unable to resize.
I wouldn't worry too much about sample variation. Buy from a reputable source and you can have any potential problems fixed. By the way, it's my favourite lens.
Feb 24, 2018 14:59:33 #
Feb 24, 2018 17:10:24 #
Steve Perry wrote:
Actually, I do.
I'm not a fan of the F/5.6 max aperture, but I find this lens more reliable at longer distances. I had a 200-400 and it was like a really good prime at close range, but anything over 25~30 meters and it was soft. This is a known issue with this optic (Thom Hogan will tell you the same thing). So, if you're shooting under 25 meters, it's a dream, beyond that, the 200-500 is better.
I'm not a fan of the F/5.6 max aperture, but I find this lens more reliable at longer distances. I had a 200-400 and it was like a really good prime at close range, but anything over 25~30 meters and it was soft. This is a known issue with this optic (Thom Hogan will tell you the same thing). So, if you're shooting under 25 meters, it's a dream, beyond that, the 200-500 is better.
Thank you for your reply, Steve. I just returned from taking shots with my lady's 200-500mm. There is no way, I'm dumping my 200-400mm for the 200-500mm. I'm glad I got that out of my system. To each their own. Cheers!
Feb 24, 2018 17:20:49 #
Feiertag wrote:
Thank you for your reply, Steve. I just returned from taking shots with my lady's 200-500mm. There is no way, I'm dumping my 200-400mm for the 200-500mm. I'm glad I got that out of my system. To each their own. Cheers!
There's always the new (and painfully expensive) 180-400 :)
Feb 24, 2018 18:14:44 #
Steve Perry wrote:
Not doing to happen! B^)There's always the new (and painfully expensive) 180-400 :)
Feb 24, 2018 18:57:15 #
My first copy purchased almost two years ago is sharp. And surprisingly so with Nikon 1.4 III TC. But too heavy for me to hand hold for any length of time. When found this out I got the 300mm f4 VR PF; I'm using that one 10x as much as the 200-500. It's also remarkably sharp with the Nikon 1.4x TC.
Feb 24, 2018 19:06:45 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
DMGill wrote:
I’ve had mine for a year with no problems or complaints. It’s a great lens. I still use my 200-400 f/4 for low light but if I didn’t already own it, I’m not sure I’d buy it now.
I read that same story on comments from a customer review, about the Nikon 200-400mm lens.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.