about | support
home
 


  Reviews by: dale keith  

View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dale keith to your Buddy List
Nikon 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR

200f2
Review Date: Apr 19, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: GREAT
Cons:
Weight, price

After reading the reviews of others I decided to pull out my lens. I had not shot it in a few years and suddenly realized what I had been missing - the perfect lens. I shot everything with the lens from butterflies to people to animals at the zoo. I even tried my 1.4 extender and the shots were great. I tried the lens on DX and FX bodies with an equal sense of satisfaction. What everybody says about the lens is true. If you have an application, the financial resources, and you like primes, the 200 F2.0 will not disappoint.

 
Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR AF-S Nikkor

Screen_Shot_2013-11-14_at_11_31_49_AM
Review Date: Apr 19, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,700.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: The shots are very sharp, the VR is fast, the zoom is solid and does not creep. It is a HUGE improvement over the original 80-400. I am using the lens with a D800 and at low light it is tack sharp edge to edge. I did not have to do any fine adjustments to the lens. It should be a real winner with the DXers.
Cons:
Price and weight. The collar and foot are weak with the foot being very short. I could not add a RRS replacement foot. I had to order a complete net collar and foot

On initial handling the lens is BIG and HEAVY. Under shooting conditions either bright sun or low indoor light, it performed very well. Too heavy as a walk around lens. Great for a day in the field

In comparison to my 200-400, and I am not a "speco techno geek", they seem very similar. However, I did try a 1.4 and 1.7 extender and prefer the 200-400 with either extender.

I enlarged several shots and did not see any real falloff at the corners. Again, the part of the photo that is my concentration, in both composition and printing, is the center.

I am not a marketing guru thus the price of everything is high to me. This lens is expensive and probably suited to those who have some experience with DSLRs and large zoom lenses. I would not suggest a beginner to start with this lens.

I did find the lens enjoyable to shoot and lent it along with my D800 to my Canon-shooting best friend. He was very satisfied with the experience and is waiting for Canon to have a very similar product.


 
Nikon 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED VR AF-S

20-400vr
Review Date: Apr 11, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $4,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: The 200-400 has been a great addition to my lens cache. I use it with a D2X and absolutely love the images. I have used the 1.4X extender and have had no issues. I tried the 2X and did experience auto focus lags. I love the total package including the case. The weight does not bother me.
Cons:
None except for price increases

In my amateur opinion the 200-400 VR lens is nothing short of great. I did purchase an RRS foot to fit the lens to my Wimberly head. I have had great success with the lens with no issues related to focus or sharpness. I have been using the lens since it first came on the market hence the price I paid. I have not done all the comparisons as others. I look at the images I get and just say as others do, WOW! It's a keeper.

 
Nikon D2Xs

d2x
Review Date: Apr 23, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $4,650.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: I purchased this camera as an upgrade from my D100. I am not a a pro or commercial photographer. I have spent additional time using the D2X and believe my technique and photos have improved. As a hobbiest the camera is FANTASTIC. Relative to the cost and the wife, it was less expensive the a new bass boat. I have had no problems with the camera and use it with my 200-400 and 70-200 almost all the time. Recently, I shot some people using their jet skis and the action shots were great. As a casual user I have found the unit to be more than sufficient.
Cons:
Nikon rebate of $500 came out just after I purchased. Newest Nikon software should be included. Nikon is very slooow to update long lenses to VR technology. Canon is a bit more market responsive on this aspect. Local dealers do not know much about the functions of the camera relative to a critique of a photo.

I am very pleased with the build and function of the D2X. I am a hobbiest and enjoy the feel and output of the D2X. For my purposes, relaxaion and the capture of nature, the D2X and associated lenses are GREAT pieces of equipment. I have had no problems with my D2X. It is actually way more than I needed but is just so enjoyable to use.

 
Nikon 500mm f/4D IF-ED AF-S II Nikkor

2131_180
Review Date: Jan 16, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: I have looked at the lens as a potential buyer. The glass is great, the AF-S fast, the weight is expected.
Cons:
In today's state of technology a non-VR lens is myopic. This lens cannot compare to a Canon IS. The cost is not worth a non-VR model as today's market place demands parity with Canon. Potential buyers should demand a VR model.

As a long time Nikon user I wish Nikon USA would step up their VR conversion to the Super Tele line. In today's era of technology Nikon needs to meet the demands of the market place. The D2X is a major tech step for Nikon and very appreciated in the photo world. The line of "look at all those white lenses," is one huge justification to adding the VR function to the Super Tele line (the 400mm, 500mm, and 600mm). They have the VR function on the 200 F2.0, the 300 F2.8, and the 200-400 F4.0. When will the executives in Nikon's product development department observe the market place? Again, I say, "look at all those white lenses at every major sporting event."