Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
  

Archive 2016 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF

  
 
Gary Irwin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #1 · p.2 #1 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Excellent summary Steve, very well said. It really does come down to personal needs/preferences between the two choices. Personally I didn't like the AF performance on the 200-500VR with my D810 and went with the 300PF even though most times it's still short even with the TC14EIII. I may yet pick up another 200-500VR considering it's so cheap and for when I really don't want to lug around more weight (600E), but for now I'm still hoping for an updated 200-400VR or better yet, a 400PF.


Aug 25, 2016 at 04:05 PM
bernardl
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #2 · p.2 #2 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


I would personnally think that a 500mm f5.6 PF is more likely that a 400, but this is just a guess.

Great review btw, I love my 300mm PF too, although it lacks contrast a bit in bright situations, that can mostly be fixed in post.

Cheers,
Bernard



Aug 25, 2016 at 05:00 PM
ariel777
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #3 · p.2 #3 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Excellent review, as usual. I have both lenses and much prefer the 300mm PF with both the 1.4iii and 1.7ii TCs. I'll deal with the shortfall in mm for the weight and convenience (and "sharpness") of the PF.


Aug 25, 2016 at 05:26 PM
binary visions
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Thanks Steve. I'm traveling and have limited/poor bandwidth a lot of places, so a 24 minute video stream isn't happening. But I always weigh your opinion heavily and have eyed the 200-500 since it's release (despite its weight, which has been what has put me off it).


Aug 26, 2016 at 02:14 AM
ckcarr
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · p.2 #5 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


binary visions wrote:
Thanks Steve. I'm traveling and have limited/poor bandwidth a lot of places, so a 24 minute video stream isn't happening. But I always weigh your opinion heavily and have eyed the 200-500 since it's release (despite its weight, which has been what has put me off it).


That things full of helium compared to the 150-600mm Sigma Sport...




Aug 26, 2016 at 07:44 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #6 · p.2 #6 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Gary Irwin wrote:
Excellent summary Steve, very well said. It really does come down to personal needs/preferences between the two choices. Personally I didn't like the AF performance on the 200-500VR with my D810 and went with the 300PF even though most times it's still short even with the TC14EIII. I may yet pick up another 200-500VR considering it's so cheap and for when I really don't want to lug around more weight (600E), but for now I'm still hoping for an updated 200-400VR or better yet, a 400PF.


Thanks - and a 400PF would be awesome - I'd be all in for that!



Aug 26, 2016 at 11:24 AM
cohenfive
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #7 · p.2 #7 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


What I like so much about all of Steve's reviews and other pieces is that he is able to bring down what could be fairly technical descriptions into words that anyone can understand, from the most advanced pros to relative simpletons like me. His discussion on back button af was the only explanation that I really understood, and I immediately switched over and haven't looked back. Thanks again Steve, and hope to see you in a month if it works out!


Aug 26, 2016 at 11:59 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #8 · p.2 #8 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


cohenfive wrote:
What I like so much about all of Steve's reviews and other pieces is that he is able to bring down what could be fairly technical descriptions into words that anyone can understand, from the most advanced pros to relative simpletons like me. His discussion on back button af was the only explanation that I really understood, and I immediately switched over and haven't looked back. Thanks again Steve, and hope to see you in a month if it works out!


Thanks And see you next month!




Aug 26, 2016 at 12:43 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #9 · p.2 #9 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


lara_ckl wrote:
Steve

Can you post the "good copy" vs "bad copy" sample shots for the 200-500? I would love to learn what to look for.


---------------------------------------------

Jawnath1n wrote:
Great question. I would like to see this too. I'm very satisfied with my 200-500 but couldn't tell you whether it was good or bad.


As promised, I'm back and I was able to dig up one of the old tests. I've posted it at my site (scroll down to "Update #1) along with a few more details covering how / why I thought the first two copies were poor. Make sure you click the photo to open it in a new tab - you may have to click it again once it load to see the full size.

http://www.backcountrygallery.com/?p=5831






Aug 30, 2016 at 06:37 PM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #10 · p.2 #10 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


OwlsEyes wrote:
I second this...
I have been using the 200-400VR for years and think that it suffered from softness due to heat haze. Now that I have the 200-500VR, I am seeing a similar (but less pronounced) phenomenon. I wonder if all of the elements in these super-tele zooms magnify the issues (internal reflection?) and leads to a perceived softness in distant subjects.... for the record, I do not see the same type of heat-shimmer related softness when using my 300 f/2.8 on the D810 or D500.

@Steve... really nice review. I totally appreciate your attention to detail and your willingness to
...Show more

Hey Bruce -

I tested the Kirk on the Sidekick - hated it. I think it actually may be worse than the factory foot. It's odd - on my regular gimbal with the weight down on the foot, it's pretty good and a modest improvement. Using it mounted sideways...yeah, not so much.



Aug 30, 2016 at 06:39 PM
bobmcg
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #11 · p.2 #11 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Steve Perry wrote:
Hey Bruce -

I tested the Kirk on the Sidekick - hated it. I think it actually may be worse than the factory foot. It's odd - on my regular gimbal with the weight down on the foot, it's pretty good and a modest improvement. Using it mounted sideways...yeah, not so much.


That's good to hear. I debated getting the Kirk plate as the regular collar isn't stable on the Sidekick. But when you figure in the cost of the Kirk collar as well as the Sidekick and mounting plate, it's the same if not more than a good condition used Wimberley Gimbal head. I contemplated the above and decided it would be better to get the gimbal head. More versatile.



Aug 30, 2016 at 07:54 PM
Jawnath1n
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · p.2 #12 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Thanks for the update Steve. Indeed that first copy does look a bit softer than expected. I can see why you returned it now. Even the wood grain is noticeably worse so it's not a back or front focus issue either. Thanks again for the update. Your stuff is great!


Aug 30, 2016 at 08:16 PM
OwlsEyes
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #13 · p.2 #13 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Steve Perry wrote:
Hey Bruce -

I tested the Kirk on the Sidekick - hated it. I think it actually may be worse than the factory foot. It's odd - on my regular gimbal with the weight down on the foot, it's pretty good and a modest improvement. Using it mounted sideways...yeah, not so much.


Hey Steve,

Thanks for checking this out for me. I hoped the Kirk collar would allow the lens to rotate smoothly, but based on the barrel design I figured it wouldn't. Guess I'll use my "big boy" gimbal when I want to track birds & use my tripod with the 200-500VR.

Truly appreciate your time,
Bruce



Aug 30, 2016 at 09:41 PM
Frogfish
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #14 · p.2 #14 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Great review Steve - as always. You have a really nice demeanour and come across really well.

Was it my thread on losing my hood and using gaffer tape that prompted those hood comments

I would love the 300PF and TCs for travel but for me the reach of the 200-500 is what it's all about. Maybe in the USA the birds / wildlife come closer but in Asia they always seem to be far away (and craft won't work when stepping off mountain sides - which is often where I'm shooting from) ! Even close in though the ability to zoom and frame is appreciated.

I've even shot with the 2.0 TC on the 200-500, it will still AF if you move it close to focus first (a bit like the Pentax F AF x1.7 on MF teles) though you're better off just cropping.

Maybe a 300PF+TC and 500/4 in my future



Aug 31, 2016 at 06:08 AM
Steve Perry
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #15 · p.2 #15 · Steve Perry's New Video - Nikon 200-500 Vs. Nikon 300PF


Frogfish wrote:
Great review Steve - as always. You have a really nice demeanour and come across really well.

Was it my thread on losing my hood and using gaffer tape that prompted those hood comments

I would love the 300PF and TCs for travel but for me the reach of the 200-500 is what it's all about. Maybe in the USA the birds / wildlife come closer but in Asia they always seem to be far away (and craft won't work when stepping off mountain sides - which is often where I'm shooting from) ! Even close in though the ability to
...Show more

Yup, I think it was your comment that inspired the gaffer tape comment - good idea It's funny, at first I thought everyone was overreacting about the hood, then mine fell off (rather easily). Thankfully, it was simple to recover that time.



Aug 31, 2016 at 07:09 AM
1      
2
       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1      
2
       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.