Nikon 200-500 lens (Page 5): I agree 100% the 200-500 is not a pro grade lens and it is terribly slow, but it does have really nice VR. It is made mostly of plastic, but it's a decent...

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

Thomas902 wrote:

rmorrison I have thousands of hours experience with long glass.... Never a problem before, only with the Made in China AF-S 200-500mm. All the Made in Japan tripod collars rotate freely without issue and don't have to be locked down before use... This is purely a "cost saving" design decision which lowers the build quality thus usefulness of this optic for action sports...

And while build quality is on the table... The hood is poorly designed... while feather light it will fall off with this least amount of pressure when mounted in reverse... Many have noticed this and commented...

Also those who were first in line for the 200-500mm ended up having to ship their lens back to Nikon for a firmware update...
https://www.nikonimgsupport.com/ni/NI_article?articleNo=000004723&configured=1&lang=en_US
This autofocus flaw is real and a showstopper... The good news is Nikon stepped up to fix this...

Once again as I initially mentioned... the AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E VR has stellar optical performance wide open from 200mm to 400mm and once stopped down to f/8 beyond 400mm.

That said it does NOT have pro-build quality... it is only a pro-sumer grade optic at best...

And if you dig down enough you'll find that many are distressed that the 200-500mm suffers horribly from particulate accumulation when used in a dusty environment... This is a REAL PROBLEM for those who live in windy, dry arid climates... and necessitates shipping the lens back to Nikon for cleaning... However all "pumpers" do this while it's a non-issue on pro-build IF lenses... There are compelling reasons why working commercial shooters pay the admission for pro-build glass...

And while I'm showcasing the shortcomings of the 200-500mm... Many of my colleagues are disappointed at the speed of it's autofocus (irregardless of camera body) Yes I've found this to be true even on the new D500... It is so frustrating to see that the camera had locked on a soccer player but the lens had failed to position the lens elements quickly enough for sharp focus... There are a myriad of parameters which go into evaluating an optic... Usability a.k.a. focus speed is high on the list for sports photographers... What good is acuity when the lens can't lock focus quickly enough...

Final thoughts? I just tested the 200-500mm against the new AF-P DX 70-300 f/4.5-6.3G ED VR and this new Pulse Stepper Motor blew away the 200-500mm Silent Wave on a D500 both in speed and accuracy by quite a large wide margin... At less than a third of the price $396.99 with a Nikon 5 year warranty this DX lens may possibly be a better choice for many casual action sports shooters than the 200-500mm... Especially since it is feather light at 415 g and can be easily hand held...

The down side to the new Pulse Stepper Tele-zoom optic? Decidedly consumer grade lens and likely will not withstand much abuse... Also it will not function (even in manual mode) on anything other than the most recent Nikon bodies... It's focus is entirely "fly by wire" driven... Please be certain to check body compatibility carefully BEFORE purchase, k?

Example:

rmorrison I have thousands of hours experience wit... (show quote)

I agree 100% the 200-500 is not a pro grade lens and it is terribly slow, but it does have really nice VR. It is made mostly of plastic, but it's a decent plastic. It has decent bokeh and as I use it on my D500 only, the sharpness between 400 and 500 is OK, probably not so much on an FX body, but then all my full frame bodies are Canon. My favorite general purpose lens is the 28-300 (both Nikon and Canon) so I would have no need for the 70-300.
I was shooting birds and chipmunks and squirrels from my deck this morning and I was using the 200-500 on my D500 and the EF 100-400L II on my 5D IV. The difference in the two lenses is like night and day. While the Nikon takes its sweet time focusing, the Canon is instantaneous, and while I like my D500, its shutter is so loud it actually scared away some of the birds.
The nice thing about the 200-500 lens is, while not being pro grade, for what it is, it's a darn good lens for thirteen hundred USD, just don't use it like a pro grade lens.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

whitewolfowner wrote:

From everything I have read about the Nikon 200-500mm, I suspect that you may have a dud.

I have seen numerous negative reports regarding the collar in particular. Do a quickie search for verification.

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

rmorrison1116 wrote:

I agree 100% the 200-500 is not a pro grade lens a... (show quote)

I have used the 200-500 since it came out and found it to be just as fast focusing as my Nikon 300 f2.8 and my Nikon 200-400 f4. I use all three of these lenses all of the time and I can tell you they are all fast focusing. I use the 200-500 to track birds in flight and my keep rate with this lens on my D500 is better than 95%. However, these are not lab results but REAL LIFE results.

whitewolfowner

DaveO wrote:

I have seen numerous negative reports regarding the collar in particular. Do a quickie search for verification.

I have not heard anything about the collar on the 200-500 until now. In many cases, it would not be a factor but I can see it being a downer for some. Usually, an after market company comes to the rescue.

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

billnikon wrote:

I have used the 200-500 since it came out and found it to be just as fast focusing as my Nikon 300 f2.8 and my Nikon 200-400 f4. I use all three of these lenses all of the time and I can tell you they are all fast focusing. I use the 200-500 to track birds in flight and my keep rate with this lens on my D500 is better than 95%. However, these are not lab results but REAL LIFE results.

My 200-500 was faster than my 80-400, particularly with my occasionally used 1.4. It is now history and my new 200-500 collar will arrive Tuesday. A little lower profile,more support and no plate for the arca-swiss mount.

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

whitewolfowner wrote:

I have not heard anything about the collar on the 200-500 until now. In many cases, it would not be a factor but I can see it being a downer for some. Usually, an after market company comes to the rescue.

I reverse the lens collar on my 200-500 and use it as a handle to carry around my lens on a daily basis for about 3 hours a day 7 days a week for the past 6 months. NO PROBLEMS.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

billnikon wrote:

I can only compare Nikon lenses because that is what I have always used. I did a side by side on 20X30 prints comparing the same scene shot with the Nikon 200-500, 300 2.8, and the 200-400 f4. After I compared various scenes and also shooting birds in flight, I sold my 300 and 200-400. Now, this was not a scientific test, I just compared MY results, and on my results I saw no difference in print quality between the three. I now own two 200-500's and I am a happy camper.

I was thinking about buying two and adding them together so I can have a 400-1000, but I dont think its possible, right?

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

OviedoPhotos wrote:

Its a great lens and its performs well in day or night. Handheld is hard. One thing that did not impress me was the case that was included. Of course I bought a great one but unlike the case that came with the Nikon 80/200 f2.8 years ago the new lens case included was disappointing.

How is it even possible for this lens to perform well at night at f/5.6?

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

mongoose777 wrote:

I was thinking about buying two and adding them together so I can have a 400-1000, but I dont think its possible, right?

I can hardly wait for someone to give you the cropped sensor focal length equivalent that seems to always magically appear!

DaveO Loc: Northeast CT

mongoose777 wrote:

How is it even possible for this lens to perform well at night at f/5.6?

Five cell flashlight on a miner's helmet.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

whitewolfowner wrote:

From everything I have read about the Nikon 200-500mm, I suspect that you may have a dud.

From everything Ive read and watched this lens in action during major sporting events is just not in the same league as the larger primes by Nikon.
If using this lens for your personal purposes then by all means this will not only save you a ton of money but will be fun to shoot, but if you are trying
to make money from this lens via paid assignments then I pity the fool who thinks it is the right tool for the job.
I personally cannot see how the quality of the overall construction will ever hold up through the rain, snow, dust & extreme hot days.
IMO, I believe this lens will suffer the most when it is fully extended as you have to put down (sometimes drop from about 12" to 18") on the ground to
use your sidekick when the action is right on top of you. I can see that any bump or scrape on the housing will eventually keep the lens from smoothly
fully extending or retracting bc of the cheaply made plastic housing. I remember far too well of that happening to my 24-70 on a few occasions as I had
to send to nikon for a full replacement of the outer sleeves as those too are cheaply made.
I remember clearly that the 200-400 VR2 suffered closer to 400mm for evening sporting events as the images appeared to break up too much from tighter crops.
Finally, I believe this lens has a lot of bang for your buck and is truly an amazing and sharp lens, but the other issues like the cheesy collar, lens hood, focus speed
and shooting near the top end @ 500mm can and will eventually cost you dearly in the end when it counts.
Id rather stick to the primes for major sporting events as they have been tested and proven for the past 20 plus years.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

DaveO wrote:

Five cell flashlight on a miner's helmet.

And Im sure I will blind all the athletes coming my way as this will be a game changer, not to mention having the fans and players
chase my monkey ass all over the field.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

pmackd wrote:

I have the 200 -500 and it is an excellent lens. ... (show quote)

The 300PF is an exceptional lens, I just love that lens.
It was fast enough when I used it for Worlds in Orlando last month.

mongoose777 Loc: Frisco Texas

Jim Bob wrote:

Quite frankly, I'm not sure if I could tote it around all day and produce consistent images. I recently submitted a few hummingbird shots to the gallery. That first one is hand-held at 1/100 and if memory serves shot at 500mm. Just goes to prove how effective the stabilization is.

I can never find those hummingbirds around here in the DFW area.
The only thing I can catch is the Hummingbird son by Seals & Crofts

whitewolfowner

mongoose777 wrote:

From everything Ive read and watched this lens in ... (show quote)

You don't have to preach to me about the lousy built quality of today's lenses. This is one of the main reasons that I am such a fan of Nikon's older built lenses. They also, many of them have superior glass in them too. The money went where it counts; the glass and the build quality; not all the bells and whistles everyone today thinks they need.