500mm for my Nikon D810: I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to...

richandtd Loc: Virginia

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

If you go with Nikon lenses, build quality is excellent across the board. Check Steve Perry's YouTube channel for recommendations.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

Don't get too caught up with the pixel peeper syndrome! The 200-500 is likely a better bang for the buck for most of us !

If you really want to split hairs, go with the F4.

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

I have the 200-500 and the copy I have is sharp through the 200-500 range on my D800. I bought it from B&H and tested it with lens charts so I could return it.

MadMikeOne Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

Here’s a link to a recent discussion on zooms. Full disclosure - I own and love the Tamron 150-600 G2. Also have the new Nikon 500mm f5.6 PF. My Tammy gets more use, though. My main subjects are birds and wildlife and i shoot with a D500. If you use the search function here and just type in “zoom lens” you should come up with helpful threads. Use the “advanced search” function, and click on “recent topics”. Otherwise, you’ll end up with VERY old topic threads.

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-631865-1.html

sadgit

I have both the 200-500 and the 500pf, I haven’t used the 200-500 since the pf (finally) arrived!!

Wilhan

I use the Nikon 300mm PF lens with my D850 and it's probably my most used lens. My friend has the 200-500mm lens and I'm not that keen on it mainly due to it's size and weight (my 300PF is about the size and weight of my 24-70mm 2.8 lens and because of this it always travels with me). I also have the Nikon 1.4 III teleconverter which gives me 420mm at f5.6 when used with the 300mmPF with very little loss in optical quality.

(Download)

OnDSnap Loc: NE New Jersey

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

Good luck finding the 500mm PF, I've been on waiting lists everywhere for months...worth waiting for.

ELNikkor

Versatility and cost would point to the 200-500 as the best choice. Check out some of the many shots and tests done with each lens on Youtube, it will help you make up your mind. If the final use of your images is for mostly personal or occasional sales, no need for the extra expense and lack of versatility of the prime.

Richard HZ Loc: Indiana, US

I have both Nikkor 200-500 and Nikkor 500 PF (newly arrived after 6 months of waiting). The Nikkor 500 PF is smaller and lighter and can fit into my camera bag. The AF is faster. Image quality is pretty much similar although 500PF is slightly better (The MTF charts show big difference). Because I like to take photography of birds and travel a lot, 500 PF is better for me. But still, I like the zoom portion of the 200-500mm. If you do not need small size and can hold or not bothering to use tripod/monopod for 200-500mm, 200-500mm might be good enough. There are some comparison video for the two lens on Youtube. You might check. Thanks!

tinyman Loc: oil city la.

Wilhan wrote:

I use the Nikon 300mm PF lens with my D850 and it's probably my most used lens. My friend has the 200-500mm lens and I'm not that keen on it mainly due to it's size and weight (my 300PF is about the size and weight of my 24-70mm 2.8 lens and because of this it always travels with me). I also have the Nikon 1.4 III teleconverter which gives me 420mm at f5.6 when used with the 300mmPF with very little loss in optical quality.

great

agillot

in the field here , TX , 2 kind of wild life , birds , 500 for small birds is bear minimum , on the other hand , a ton of deer , semi tame , seen at time a group of 15 , in that case 500 too big .a 200/500 and later with a TC 1.4 , would be ideal .i would go for the zoom . i use a old nikkor 800mm prime , and for smaller birds it is minimum on a cropped sensor .

grandpaw

I like it!!!

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

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

I own and use both the Nikon 200-500 5.6 and the Nikon 500 5.6 PF. Yes the 500 PF weighs less than the 200-500. When I carry a lens around all day in Florida's wetlands the 500 PF is really nice to have. It is nice to have the variable range that the 200-500 delivers.
But, many will say here that the 500 prime will give sharper images than the 200- 500. I will not be saying that, I have made 20X30 prints from both lenses and it is really hard to tell the difference. If you know what you are doing you can get great results from both of these lenses. The first shot below is from the 200-500, the second is from the 500 PF.

DavidPine Loc: Fredericksburg, TX

richandtd wrote:

I use both a D810 and D300 the current lenses are the the 17mm-35mm 2.8 , 50mm 1.4G , 105mm 2.8, and the AF-S VR-NIKKOR 70MM-200MM 1:2.8G. I have a desire to get into birds and need a longer lens. I’ve been looking at the AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/5.6E PF ED and the VR AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR from NIKONUSA.COM from my understanding the prime will give a better photograph than the zoom and it weighs less. Is there that much of a difference? What about the overall build quality?

Many wildlife photographers and birders love the combination of the D500 and 200-500 or 500FP. Look at Back Country Gallery with Steve Perry. He's a Nikon Shooter and a member here.