amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Nikkor AF-S 70-200 VR II is not really "long enough" for a lot of wildlife photography, but since you have a 200-500mm, you have that covered.

HOWEVER, I find it a little surprising that you don't already have a 70-200mm in your kit. It's one of the most useful of all zooms. In fact, I use mine enough that I bought a second one as a backup (and, incidentally, I actually now use the backup more than my original f/2.8... the backup is a smaller/ligher f/4 version that also has great image quality).

It's also not a macro lens, only able to do 0.12X magnification on it's own (the newer AF-S 70-200 VR "FL" which superseded the "II" is closer focusing, can do 0.21X on it's own).

HOWEVER, if you get a set of macro extension tubes, you can use the 70-200 for close-ups, too. For the image below, I used a 20 or 25mm extension tube on my Canon 70-200L IS lens (which is limited in it's close-up ability, similar to the Nikkor II)....



I recommend the Kenko macro extension tube set. It's a good value at around $130 for a set of three, high quality tubes (12mm, 20mm & 36mm) which fully support all lens functions and can be used singly or stacked to provide higher magnification. I started using macro extension tubes 25+ years ago and have found them so useful I always have some in my bag, just in case they're needed. They don't take up much room or add much weight. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/375238-REG/Kenko_AEXTUBEDGN_Auto_Extension_Tube_Set.html

The Nikkor AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR "II" is an excellent lens... but you might want consider the even better "FL" with fluorite added, which is even better (less chromatic aberration and even sharper). The "FL" is considerably more expensive, even though it's currently on sale with a hefty discount. Also handle the f/2.8 lenses to see if you're okay with the size and weight. If you find it a bit much, the f/4 version might be a good alternative.

And, no, in my opinion, you don't need another "real" macro lens like the Nikkor 105mm. It sounds as if the Tamron 90mm is meeting your needs very well.

coolhanduke Loc: Redondo Beach, CA

I have the 70-200 lens and 2X convertor. I used it mostly for sports. You loose like 2 stops with the extender. The lens is pretty heavy. I use my 200-500 for wildlife.

Bill P

Great general purpose lens. Works well with the 1.7 extender.
But....

...lousy macro lens. Would need about 20 feet of extension tubes.

Barney006

My experience with wildlife and zoom lenses is this... I knew I was going to have to be shooting handheld in Costa Rica since monkeys usually don't hold still enough for camera support from a tripod. I tried shooting handheld with my D850 and 200-500mm lens (my wildlife lens) and had trouble keeping it steady enough for crisp photos. I looked at other options, and found that with my 70-200 2.8, and a Nikon 2x doubler, I got double the focal length and didn't lose as much on the max F-stop. Plus, with that setup, I was able to get shots in focus and in most cases, crisp (my only challenges were when I was shooting in very dark environments and needed to bump up my ISO to get the shutter speed up). I highly recommend this lens -- it is pretty much my go-to lens and with the doubler, a great handheld rig.

kcalder

The Nikon 200mm f/4 is a fantastic very sharp macro lens. The 70-200mm is not a macro lens. I use it primarily for portraits.

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

OK, I did not know that you had the Tamron 90mm. I understand it is an excellent lens. Yes, getting the Nikkor 105 maybe a tad redundant. I can't recall if the Tamron 90 has image stabilization but that is something to consider.
I have a Tamron 24-70 G2 series and a Tamron 150-600 G2 series for my D750 and I really like them both. I also had the Nikon 40 f/2.8 and that also was a great little lens for not much $$. I had that for my D7000 which I traded for a Fujifilm X-T2.

I do wish I had some sort of macro/close-up lens either for the D750 or the X-T2. So I need to decide if I will get a macro for the D750 or the X-T2. Tough call. I might add that the Tokina 100mm is also an excellent lens for macro work. I tried a friend of mine and I was really impressed. Have not tried any Sigma lenses, however.

Barndog Loc: Tacoma

I have used the Nikon TC14EIII on the 70-200 VR model (the first model of the lens) and have had excellent results from it. There should be some used ones available.

gemofnj

Thank you so much. 🤗 I just ordered the TC14EIII which can be used in my 300mm and 200/500 mm.

Now debating on the 70-300mm 2.8 vrii. I’m not into sports so I would want to make a big investment for it to sit in the bag.

Fotomacher Loc: Toronto

I use this lens with a TC17EII. With no visible degradation of IQ. I have compared images captured at 300mm effective focal length with images shot with my AFS 300mm f/4 and there is no significant difference.

Barndog Loc: Tacoma

Check out MPB for used gear. Bought a Nikon 24-70 listed like new and not sure anyone else had touched it. Also a Tokina 16-28 like new also. They beat everyone’s prices by close to $300 and they offer free shipping and no tax.

Jules Karney Loc: Las Vegas, Nevada

I purchased this lens about 3 weeks ago and have shot about 10 basketball games with it. A wonderful lens with sharpness and nice bokeh. Not a complaint.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

I have an 80-200 AFD and its not a true macro obviously, but if you need working distance it isn't a bone either.

DennisC. Loc: Antelope, CA

I have had this lens since it first came out, have used it on the D800, D810 and now the D850. Besides excellent sharpness don't forget fast autofocus, and a very good stabilizer too.

gemofnj

Jules Thank you! I appreciate your feedback.🤗

gemofnj