Aile

I have both and would not give either up.... that's is unless my wife makes me- have I drawn a picture in your head-

Imagemine Loc: St. Louis USA

Just keep in mind it's a heavy lens but a good lens I own 1 if you're not doing a lot of wildlife or far away subjects you won't use it much it should fit well, mine is on my d500 & df both have Nikon F mounts. Still it's an excellent lens, but you will need a tripod for lowlight shots so I would go for it if it's in good shape a new 1 is $11,00-$13,00 depending
The range can be very helpful shooting sports

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

The Nikon 200-500 is sharp throughout it's range. It is extremely sharp at 500. I have used that lens for almost three years and commonly show print at 500 mm to 20X30 without issue.
Again, the Nikon 200-500 is extremely sharp at 500mm.

Doc Barry Loc: Huntsville, Alabama USA

I have the Tamron 150-600 G2 I use with my D810. It is an excellent copy I have. Using the TAP-IN Console to program the lens for a number of ranges and zooms to match a specific camera allows very sharp images over the entire range I found. With the Nikkor 200-500 lens, you can only AF tune for a single value. The Tamron is well suited for an outing in Kenya. Also, take your other lens.

I recently spent a couple of weeks shooting in Ireland and carried my "heavy" gear. No problem for me, but others on the tour could hardly lift the camera and lens. (They need to go to the gym I think.) I do suggest that you get a good shoulder strap. I like the Sun Snipper because it has some shock absorber built in and it has a steel cable internally to keep from suffering slash and run.

Have a great trip!

Bill P

I have been to Africa, but not Kenya, but in my experience, you could take pictures of Kenya from the cape with that monster. I also came with a long zoom, but I rarely shot with anything but the 70-200/2.8, once or twice with a 1.7 extender. Save your back, even if in a jeep it will be hard to handle, and save the money to use bringing home boxes of Cuban cigars.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Because of it's better engineered lenses, and the fact that they are made start to finish by one company (not parted out to the lowest bidder) Nikon lenses DO NOT NEED fine tuned. I have shot Nikon glass for over 50 years and every lens, manual and auto focus have not needed fine tuning to get sharp images from every distance. My 20X30 competition prints speak for them selves. Not a rotten apple in the bunch.
I am happy that you like your Tamron, I am sure after you spend TIME fine tuning your lens it may give the same result as a out of the box Nikon.

barryb Loc: Kansas

While I didn't look at every response, I didn't see the most important fact. Depending on your guide, when I was on safari and our guide had sand bags to steady camera/lens on the top of the land cruiser. I shot with a 150-600, and your 200, even with crop sensor isn't enough. If your guide is good, he will turn off the motor every time you go to shoot, as the vibration will cause blur. I would encourage you to shoot at least a shutter speed of 800-1000, so you can stop the action. While it's true the 200-500 is heavier, to shoot with a shorter lens would mean you would not get the shots that you are hoping for. I had 3000 shots, but only a small number where shot any less than 200 mm. Have an incredible trip!

Doc Barry Loc: Huntsville, Alabama USA

I'm glad you are so lucky Bill. I have a fine collection of Nikon pro-glass and have AF tuned each of them. FoCal is a good tool to use to obtain the best AF tune for a given lens. Nikon zoom lens have a proprietary compensation equation that is tweaked at the factory so that it (hopefully) stays sharp over the distance and zoom ranges. Same is true for prime lenses regarding the need to AF tune. However, Nikon can not make every camera body to have the AF and imaging distances be the same. In other words, this is an inherent characteristic of all DSLR cameras. Mirrorless cameras do not need AF tune because there isn't the mirror.

You are a fortunate photographer to have never had to AF tweak your lenses. But I bet you a chocolate chip cookie that I could AF tweak your lenses and improve their resolution/MTF.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Fine tuning a f4 or f2.8 for a specific distance is fine. If you read what I was responding to first before responding you would see that the OP was taking about a f6.3 lens used at long distance. Which, as any competent photographer knows, fine tuning is unnecessary.
And I am glad you fine tune your lenses, BUT IT IS ONLY GOOD FOR THE DISTANCE YOU FINE TUNE IT FOR. (and this comes directly from Nikon, not me)

Doc Barry Loc: Huntsville, Alabama USA

Kindly provide a reference to this statement from Nikon. If that is true, they are making bad products. Canon offers three AF tunes per lens. Wonder why? As I stated, Nikon zooms are factory tuned by adjusting the coefficients in the compensation equation programed in the lenses. Prime lenses rely upon Nikon's precision mechanical fabrication and assembly, but still require AF tune because of the camera characteristics.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I participate in NPS, and when the 200-500 came out it was at the same time I was selling my 600mm F4, and going hand-held. I had grown accustomed to the quality and handling of the 600, and was a little worried about both on the 200-500. It was a step down in quality, but what really bothered me was the build quality. No environmental sealing, so I would have to leave it home on rainy/snowy daysn or in dry dusty environments such as African Safaris. It is definitely a dust pumper. That was a deal breaker. The other thing that bothered me was the image quality which was visibly not as good as the 600, and things only got worse when I used a 1.4TC.

So . . .

I looked at the other offerings, and found that the first round of 150-600s from Sigma and Tamron, were worse. I didn't want to spend the $$$ for the Sport, but I borrowed one anyway, just out of curiosity, and I was blown away by the image quality. You can see some of the results below.

Having owned both, I can say, without hesitation, that the Sigma Sport is an excellent replacement for the 600mmF4. There are times when the F4 is nice to have, but DoF is so shallow that it sometimes makes it difficult to get what you want in focus.

Now, today, as I mentioned earlier, I would likely buy the Tamron G2 - which I have since used and liked just as much as my Sport. Actually, more so - very good build quality, Tap-in console (like Sigma's dock), and a weight savings of 2 lbs. I find it optically comparable to the Sport, and right up there with the 600mmF4. I did like the 200-500, but the number of compromises were too numerous to ignore.

A lot of photographers got the 200-500 and love it. But I would bet that chocolate chip cookie that none ventured beyond the Nikon offering to see what was out there.

.

common yellowthroat

(Download)

indigo bunting

(Download)

blue gray gnatchatcher

(Download)

pileated woodpecker

(Download)

prothonotary warbler

(Download)

agillot

what about the 18/400 tamron , much smaller lighter and descent . maybe tamron makes a tc1.4 to go with it .

Ken C

I bought a refurbished lens last year. I am 74 and while it is a heavy lens I have enjoyed it on a lot of trips,I took it to the zoo one day and everyone was very envy of the photos I had. I shoot kid sports, animals, birds scenic close ups and even portraits! Just a great lens.
Ken

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Actually, Nikon advises that AF tuning is NOT a permanent fix for lens/camera focus issues, and they do state that AF Fine Tuning is not normally required.

https://nps.nikonimaging.com/technical_solutions/d4s_tips/af_fine-tuning/

It is a very crude "focus offset" that only addresses a single focal length at a single distance, yet affects ALL focus behavior - making the ham-handed approach just that -

The software and hardware adjustments available to a tech to "fix" a focus issue are far more granular and accurate than the tool provided in some of Nikon's cameras.

It is usually better to ensure that all your gear is within factory spec - which avoids the need to fine tune stuff. The FoCal system is great at identifying a focus issue, but AF Fine Tune is the last thing I'd do to try and fix it. Too many lenses, too many camera bodies (used through the years), to get obsessive over sharpness and detail capture. I'd rather be out taking pictures of real subjects than trying to eek out the last drop of sharpness from my gear. If there is a problem, off it goes to Nikon.

vandy

I bought a refurbed 24-120 lens from Nikon about a year ago and have had no problems with it.