Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been looking for something with serious reach to complete my set up. Plan to use for sunsets. nature, animals. etc. Does anyone have experience with the 200-500? I have been researching and so far have read quite a few positive reviews. I generally take reviews with a grain of salt and rely on real world experiences to help me make up my mind. My initial thinking was a 300mm+ 1.4 tele but I am not too keen on teles. My budget in the $1500 range. Thanks for any input.
Hard to beat the 200-500! I shoot it and the G2 and prefer the 200-500 particularly in lower lighting opportunities. I have done a lot of wildlife shots the past couple years and have been quite pleased. Several thousand shots on a D7100,500 and 850. Rarely do I use the 1.4 and would not purchase it again. Good on my 70-200, but that's another story!
Royce Moss wrote:
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been looking for something with serious reach to complete my set up. Plan to use for sunsets. nature, animals. etc. Does anyone have experience with the 200-500? I have been researching and so far have read quite a few positive reviews. I generally take reviews with a grain of salt and rely on real world experiences to help me make up my mind. My initial thinking was a 300mm+ 1.4 tele but I am not too keen on teles. My budget in the $1500 range. Thanks for any input.
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been lo... (
show quote)
Love my 200-500, just shot with it in Yellowstone NP. Going to Costa Rica in about 10 days and taking it along. I use a 1.4 tele when needed. I also take along the Nikon 80-400 for a more stable hand-held shot, but can shoot hand-held if I need to with the 200-500.
Royce Moss wrote:
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been looking for something with serious reach to complete my set up. Plan to use for sunsets. nature, animals. etc. Does anyone have experience with the 200-500? I have been researching and so far have read quite a few positive reviews. I generally take reviews with a grain of salt and rely on real world experiences to help me make up my mind. My initial thinking was a 300mm+ 1.4 tele but I am not too keen on teles. My budget in the $1500 range. Thanks for any input.
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been lo... (
show quote)
Hi Royce, I've been using this lens for some time now and have captured some fantastic pictures with it. No reason to hesitate buying this lens. vz
Thanks guys for the quick replies sounds like a winner so far.
DirtFarmer
Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA
Got a 200-500 maybe 3 years ago. It's a keeper. Has a up to date VR which is much better than the VR on my 10 year old lenses. I have hand held it at 500mm and 1/10 second. It is sharp as far as I can determine.
When I first got it, I looked through the viewfinder and the image was wobbling around at 500mm as I would expect with a long lens. When I half-pressed the shutter (turning on the VR) the image stopped wobbling. It would occasionally jump. I interpret that as the VR keeping the image stable until it hit the end of its range, at which point it jumped to a new stable point. The time frame was seconds, not normal exposure times.
Crop from image taken at a concert, 500mm, last row of the hall, maybe 50 meters away,
turp77
Loc: Connecticut, Plainfield
Royce Moss wrote:
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been looking for something with serious reach to complete my set up. Plan to use for sunsets. nature, animals. etc. Does anyone have experience with the 200-500? I have been researching and so far have read quite a few positive reviews. I generally take reviews with a grain of salt and rely on real world experiences to help me make up my mind. My initial thinking was a 300mm+ 1.4 tele but I am not too keen on teles. My budget in the $1500 range. Thanks for any input.
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been lo... (
show quote)
This lens is fantastic I hand held 500mm 50 feet away and I can see me in the reflection in the stainless steel ball. For the price and the performance you will not be disappointed
You might want to consider one from the Nikon reconditioned web site. Got mine there for less than $1,100 and it is perfect in every way.
Royce Moss wrote:
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been looking for something with serious reach to complete my set up. Plan to use for sunsets. nature, animals. etc. Does anyone have experience with the 200-500? I have been researching and so far have read quite a few positive reviews. I generally take reviews with a grain of salt and rely on real world experiences to help me make up my mind. My initial thinking was a 300mm+ 1.4 tele but I am not too keen on teles. My budget in the $1500 range. Thanks for any input.
Hey Hoggers, anyone use the Nikon 200-500? Been lo... (
show quote)
I use it with the D500 and it's a great combo.
For slow moving animals it's incredible. For fast moving animals, as in birds in flight, it can be a little slow to acquire and track focus. I'd stress I'm only talking about birds I flight, but I found I had a much higher keeper rate when I upgraded from a D7200 to a D500. However if your animals aren't moving around as fast, I think you'll be extremely happy with the lens. It is heavy, so bear that in mind, and the zoom ring takes a couple of turns to go from one extreme to the other. However when you start comparing to the high end lenses which are even heavier, and much more expensive, you realise it's in a class of its own, and can only really be compared to the Tamron and Sigma 150-600's. My local camera store love this lens, and were almost drooling over how good it is, and they also stock the Tamron which nobody even mentioned, they actually steered me away from it and towards the Nikon.
I use the Nikkor 200-500mm on a D810. It is a remarkable piece of glass. I received the recommendation from Steve Perry, a member of this site.
Steve recommended that I cover the range. So I bought the Nikkor 24-70 f2.8, the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8, the Nikkor 200-500, and use the Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 Micro. All produce incredible images. You won't be disappointed in any of them.
I disagree with ToBoldlyGo, that the 200-500 has slow focus. I believe that had more to do with his camera body.
I really like my 200-500. It’s sharp and the VR works well. With some practice it can be hand held. I use it with a D750.
Royce,
I bought this lens because my 500mm F/4.0 was getting too heavy (as I got older it got heavier) to hand hold. The 200-500 produces sharp pictures with nice contrast.
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.
In my opinion (for what it's worth) it would be a good addition to your kit. I have no intentions of retiring mine any time soon.
--
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.