Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

I don't use a tele converter with any lens .. as the Post cropped image from a 36 mega pix D810 is 5% sharper than using a 1.4 tele con AND NOT cropping .. .. I have tested 7nways to Sunday ...I rented .., tested tele converters ..why add an extr pc of glass .. spend $500 more .. and the cropped non tele conv still beats it out not by much .., but even if the same ...spend more money .., add more glass .. no way ...

Like wise ... the 200-500 is wonderful on a DX 7100..., 7200 ,.. D500 ... and I will be first to say I have a blast using this lens on my 7100 ... it can not compare to the sharpness on using this lens on a FX .. especially A D810 ...so my 7100 is used to hold my 200-500 while the D810 Has another lens on it .. when I need quick action .. I can respond ..., and vise versa. . 200-500 on the D810 and another FX lens on the 7100 ..., I can pull the 200-500 off the 7100 and pull the 24-70 off the D810 AND switch them in 5 seconds or less ...

From 1/4 mile away ..$1,500 manfrotto and head .., mirror up .., electronic trigger ... cropped .., I can see the faces on the people on top of Diamond Head with my D810 AND THE 200-500 ..., Then switching to my 7100 same set up .., and the 200-500 .., cropped or not .., I can see the image of the people but their faces are blurry ... the diff is nite and day for a sharpness freak like me ...

To people who are used to DX performance and their respective sharpness there of ..... that's great ..., but once they rent or purchase and use a full,frame like the D810 ..., THEY CANT IMAGINE MORE THAN WHAT THEIR DX provides ... until then .. they are in a DX world .., which is fine ..!!! , but don't try to say that it is equal to or better than FX using the same lens and comparing the performance of same ..

Once you go to the eye doctor and get glasses ... or the ear specialist and get a hearing aid ...you never could imagine what you have been missing out on ...

Bodlderdash my ....A...

I don't know of a single professional in the entire photo community who thinks a 200-500 is sharper on a DX than a FX AT least where 36 mega pix is concerned ....! Now get with it ...

crappiefever Loc: Central Pa

So right you are but take fx crop and resize it to get same image size as you would get with dx sensor and and see what happens with the full sensor resolution!

lrm Loc: Sarasota, FL

so what is your point. this article is about the quality of the 200-500 lens, not which camera is better. If you move up form the D810 to medium format or higher, we can expect better sharpness also. Again, this subject was directed to the many recent requests for info on the 200-500 lens. I think the photos shown speak for themselves.

crappiefever Loc: Central Pa

Agree 100% Quality of this lens is great if you don't have to crop the crap out of photo. Maybe you want to take a look at my website if your in doubt. Mainly Eagles were shot with this combo .

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

Nobody said DX was sharper,your reading acumen might be a little lacking,but the arguments persist regarding the cropping of full frame,etc,fat pixels,heavier pixel concentration,you name it....to say that the D810 is worlds better is pure balderdash. Some will say it it better,but my argument is that it is not "worlds better and amazing in comparison." I also have a D810 to go with my D500 and D7100,so you're not impressing me with your little rant. I prefer the color rendition in many photos of the 810,but to say it is "worlds" better than the D7100 for long wildlife shots is strictly an opinion. Maybe my D810 is not as sharp as yours or my D7100 is extra sharp,but the OP's image is top shelf. Why are many pros picking up D500's for wildlife photos? Maybe you don't know of any pros who have done that. Now get with it! No more balderdash!

Remember,the discussion was about the 200-500 with a long wildlife shot.

photophile Loc: Lakewood, Ohio, USA

I like how you cropped 1 for a fine close up.

PAR4DCR Loc: A Sunny Place

I think it works!!!

Don

Dr.Nikon Loc: Honolulu Hawaii

I agree on an FX crop thing .., when the FX IS 24 mega pixel and below which most FX HAVE .. .. but with 36 megapixel you can crop and have a lot left over ...

And yes .., some D810's came off the assembly line as a 1 .. while others were 5's but were withing the pass no pass range and got shipped ..

I am aware as well that NOT all 200-500 were tack sharp .. many were not ..., but were shipped are are in use ..

The argument which is better .. Canon or Nikon will continue for eons .., the same with teleconverters vs not ..., oh well ..

gjgallager Loc: North Central CT & Space Coast Florida

This lens is on my GAS list, I'll try it on my D5100 (which I'd like to upgrade to a D7xxx) and my D750. It seems like every time I get the $$ set aside something else comes up, LOL.

JeffDavidson Loc: Originally Detroit Now Los Angeles

Beautiful!

Vince68 Loc: Wappingers Falls, NY

Great shot, so sharp. Beautiful

sailorsmom Loc: Souderton, PA

Beautiful, lrm!

Valsmere Loc: New Jersey

I also have this lens. However mine is mounted on my d750, I just wish I had the time to go out with it, unfortunately work has picked up for me at the moment. But as soon as I get the chance I hope to put it through its paces. Awesome shots and thank you for sharing!

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

I am fresh out of balderdash this morning!

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Greg