larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I have had the 200-500mm zoom since shortly after it came out. It is a fun, sharp lens to use. I don't shoot it all day, and I usually shoot it hand-held. It can get a little heavy for me after a while, but it's not particularly onerous to use. The VR is really very good. Some folks that I know who have one feel that the tripod foot is not very good. If I used the lens on a tripod. I might agree, but as it is, it doesn't matter.

When I bought, the price was on the order of $1400, which I felt was a steal. I still feel that way.

To me, the big disappointment is that it came with a dust bag rather than a proper protective carrying case. I don't know if that is still true or not. I found a case for one of the 400mm Tamron zooms that is a mostly good fit for it.

I still shoot an older version of the 300mm f/4 lens that still works well for me, so I can't speak to the second lens on your list. I also have no experience with the 500mm.

Bill_de Loc: US

Still $1400 regular price.

---

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Thank you. I am certain that I saw a price around $1700 last time I looked on the NikonUSA site. Guess not. I've edited my post to reflect the correct information. Thanks.

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

I shoot wildlife in Florida Wetlands, I have used all three of these lenses extensively. In my honest opinion, all three give excellent results in the right hands.
The advantage of the 200-500 is that you can compose right in the camera, you are not married to one focal length. That said I now shoot primarily with the Sony 600 f4 and the Nikon 500 FL 5.6. I use the Nikon primarily because it is so much lighter than the 500 f4. My Sony 600 f4 is also very hand hold able. Lightest of equipment is important in wildlife photography. Mobility gives you the advantage to get the shot you have always dreamed of.
Again, IMHO, all three will give you good results.
But for the money, the Nikon 500 5.6 FL cannot be beat, a good photographer can produce professional results from all three lenses you have listed.
Below is an example of the sharpness of the 500 5.6, the eye of the brown water snake can be seen, this lens is one of the sharpest lenses I have ever used.
The second image was shot with the 200-500, again, this lens is no slouch.
Good luck and keep on shooting until the end.

Orphoto Loc: Oregon

I spent most of yesterday walking around with the 300 pf. Wonderful to use. Only very slightly less sharp than 300 2.8 afs when used on d850. Also works well with deep space objects on tracker.

SonyBug

Sort of demanding, aren't you?

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

It would be very interesting indeed for you to show examples proving your point that the 300 PF 4 is slightly less sharp than the Nikon 300 2.8. It has been my findings that their is no difference in SHARPNESS.

oldgrayowl

You do realize that China is a 'build to print ' shop? Companies contract with otger companies in China to manufacture items to the original company's specs and to a certain cost schedule?

Jack47 Loc: Ontario

I have the 200-500. It is obviously not as good as the primes but more versatile. I dont regret buying it.

GLSmith Loc: Tampa, Fl

I can only speak for the 500. Roughly the size & weight of the Nikon 70-200 F2.8, Crisp pictures & fast focusing. However the foot mount is a total piece of crap...I purchased a Kirk Enterprise replacement foot the day I ordered the 500. For fun I mated the 500 to a Nikon 1.4 & Nikon 1.7 TC.....less than pleased with the images. My main area of photography is rocket launches & focus on a moving target 2-3 miles is critical.
Overall, I don't care where a product is made...I'm not going down the path of Nikons reported financial issues & offshoring all of their products.
The only true Delta I could possibly see is if the lens is ever dmaged in any way, it has to go back to the place of manufacture as the 500 is totally assembled by hand.

BebuLamar

I hate that practice the most.
I prefer a company makes their products themselves at their country. This is best.
Second they open up shop in other countries to use the cheaper labor but still own and run the factory themselves.
The worst is simply contract out to another company to make the products for them.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

Let’s leave a China discussion to a different forum section or PM and keep this thread to it’s original subject.

Mainridge Loc: NW Mich, SW Fla

I own the first two lenses and use them mainly with my D500. My original go to wildlife lens was the 200-500mm, but since having some wrist issues/pain (don’t you love the aging process?), I find it personally more difficult to hand hold this lens. Therefore, I have been using the 300PF much more frequently. It is wonderful to carry on hikes and use it both with and without the 1.4 tele. I do miss the reach of the 200-500mm for birds and am intrigued about the 500PF but hold back on purchasing it due to budget considerations. I certainly recommend both the 200-500mm and the 300pf.

Bill_de Loc: US

Seems like you have the PF version as opposed to the one the OP asked about.

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 500mm f/4E FL ED VR

---

BobHartung Loc: Bettendorf, IA

This is what I found. Not specific but informative.