Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
Nikon 200-500 f/5.6EED VR Lens
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 next>>
Feb 2, 2019 04:40:56   #
rdusso
 
I am looking at purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. My concern is that it is not weather sealed and I shot a lot at the dirt race track during the summer; which obviously is dusty.

Who out here has this lens and is the non-weather seal an issue?

Any feed back would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bobby

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 05:29:29   #
rmorrison1116 (a regular here)
 
I have this lens and as long as you give it a good wipe down after each use at the dusty dog track, you will be ok.
I often carry this lens attached to my D500, in the trunk of my motorcycle, weather permitting, and I've had no issues with it. I've shot with it at the beach numerous times and from a location with several dusty dirt roads and as I mentioned, no problems.

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 05:30:32   #
Largobob
 
I own and use the Nikon 200-500....and find that it delivers outstanding images when I do my part.

I have never had any issue with any of my Nikon bodies or lenses....never even had to clean a sensor. But then, I don't take any of my equipment into inclement or hostile environments.

I will tell you that like many other zooms, the 200-500 "breathes" as it's length changes while being zoomed. That displaced volume of air has to come from somewhere, and go somewhere.

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 05:34:11   #
rdusso
 
What's your opinion of the lens over all?
Seems like a alot of play from 200 to 500, not sure how to explain... seems you cant go from 200 to 500 in one twist need to regripe and twist to go the full length.

Thank you for responding

Bobbt

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 06:24:23   #
sailfree
 
I own the lens and I don’t know if my experience was related to weather sealing but for your info, my lens bécame infected with internal fungus. The repair shop said it couldn’t be cleaned and some of the lens elements had to be replaced. The repair cost quoted was so high I decided buying a new long lens was the better option. Again, I don’t know if the fungus was or was not related to weather seals. I used the lens in difficult environments on Kodiak Island, in Panama, etc. without problems until the fungus appeared.

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 06:28:57   #
Retired CPO (a regular here)
 
I've had the lens for about a month and have over 1000 photos from it. Overall, you are right, it takes about a twist and a half to get from one end to the other. Not an issue with me. I've had it out in dust and light rain, again, not an issue. I wouldn't use it in heavy rain and certainly wouldn't want to dunk it. I've used it at the beach with no problems or concerns, I did wipe it down with a damp cloth along with the body. I thinks it's a great lens. No comparison to the Tamron I replaced it with. Don't have a problem with Tamron in general but the Nikon, in this case, beats the pants off the Tamron.

| Reply
Feb 2, 2019 06:59:57   #
Largobob
 
rdusso wrote:
What's your opinion of the lens over all?
Seems like a alot of play from 200 to 500, not sure how to explain... seems you cant go from 200 to 500 in one twist need to regripe and twist to go the full length.

Thank you for responding

Bobbt


Yup, the twist and a half will keep your wrist muscles in shape. LOL. Overall, I really like the lens.

I am fussy about owning/shooting with "good glass." Except for the 200-500, all of my Nikon lenses are "gold band" (like Canon's L series) series of pro glass. The 24-70 f/2.8; the 70-200 f/2.8; the 105 Micro f/2.8; each produce exceptional images. While the 200-500 is NOT one of Nikon's pro-series offerings...it produces great images. For the price, it is very hard to beat. I am happy with its performance.

I'm not sure whether I have ever actually had to go from 200-500 quickly. Generally, only a small adjustment puts me in-frame. So, for me and the way I shoot, the zoom/twist is not an issue.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 08:24:51   #
aflundi
 
rdusso wrote:
I am looking at purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. My concern is that it is not weather sealed and I shot a lot at the dirt race track during the summer; which obviously is dusty.

Who out here has this lens and is the non-weather seal an issue?

I have and love the Nikon 200-500. It has worked quite well for me.

BUT, that's because I don't treat it like it is weather sealed, when it obviously isn't.

I'm not sure why you're asking the question as you clearly know it's doesn't have the kind of sealing you need.

The Sigma 150-600 Sport or possibly the Tamron 150-600 G2 are your obvious options in this class of lens.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 09:53:13   #
SusanFromVermont
 
rdusso wrote:
I am looking at purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. My concern is that it is not weather sealed and I shot a lot at the dirt race track during the summer; which obviously is dusty.

Who out here has this lens and is the non-weather seal an issue?

Any feed back would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bobby

I recently purchased the 200-500mm, and knowing it is not weather sealed, I also purchased some inexpensive rain sleeves. I keep them in my bag just in case it starts raining! There are also some more expensive options, but I figure as long as I take care of the lens I will not need to go that route. If you decide to use one of these forms of protection, just make sure it is the right size for such a long lens!

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 10:32:34   #
Charlie C
 
rdusso wrote:
I am looking at purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. My concern is that it is not weather sealed and I shot a lot at the dirt race track during the summer; which obviously is dusty.

Who out here has this lens and is the non-weather seal an issue?

Any feed back would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bobby


Get a lens rain hood: LensCoat RainCoat Large Sleeve (Black) B&H # LELCRSLBK MFR # LCRSLBK

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 12:01:11   #
Jim Eads
 
Great lens. Wish I could afford 2! Took mine to Alaska and used the lense coat as mentioned. No issues.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 12:18:02   #
aflundi
 
Another alternative worth, I think, considering is a 70-200/2.8 with a teleconverter. The lens is weather sealed, internal focus and zoom, very fast and precise focusing, and with a 2x TC would become a 140-400/5.6. That would compete pretty well against a 200-500/5.6 and you could avoid the dust problems.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 12:32:08   #
Jamers
 
I have been looking at this lens and have seen 200-500E PF and 200-500 ED VR. I shoot with a Nikon D800E, will either of these lens work? Also considering the prime 500 5.6.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 13:12:09   #
billnikon (a regular here)
 
rdusso wrote:
I am looking at purchasing the Nikon 200-500 lens. My concern is that it is not weather sealed and I shot a lot at the dirt race track during the summer; which obviously is dusty.

Who out here has this lens and is the non-weather seal an issue?

Any feed back would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Bobby


I have had mine for three years and it is in every day use. Not even one piece of dust in the interior of the lens.
And, even a weather sealed lens is not immune to dust particles getting into the lens over the years.

| Reply
Feb 3, 2019 13:34:57   #
larryepage
 
I have had and used the 200-500 for just over a year. It is a very good lens for the price, but it is less than a "pro" lens in both optical design and physical design & materials.

It does a very nice job, but I suspect that it will not withstand rough or abusive handling. Be aware tthat it comes with a dust bag, not a full protective case. I'm still looking for a case that fits the way I think it should.

So yes...it is a very nice lens. But it does not match the "Gold Ring" standards.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2019 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.