p.14 #1 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I just placed my order with Camera Canada - they currently have the 200-500 in stock (and it's cheaper than buying from a US retailer). I'll be borrowing a D7100 from a friend so I can give the lens a test run. This may be the lens that gets me to switch from Canon to Nikon.
p.14 #3 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Chaz wrote:
nugeny wrote:
Thanks, Bob - the lens really feels good in the hand. I'll be anxious to get out for some wildlife shooting.
You'd better hurry up and grab one of these for your wildlife trips as well! Nikon should sell very many of these.
Problem : I am shooting 80-400, that served me well in my recent trip to Pantanal, when the 400/2.4 decided to freak out. You will see the jaguars!! all captured with 80-400/5.6. BTW, the D7200 is great!
p.14 #4 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Nugeny wrote: Problem : I am shooting 80-400, that served me well in my recent trip to Pantanal, when the 400/2.4 decided to freak out. You will see the jaguars!! all captured with 80-400/5.6. BTW, the D7200 is great!
No problem, Bob. I, too, love the new 80-400. But that didn't stop me from adding the new 200-500. Now I love BOTH. Just call me a pig!
Having both handy is like wearing both a belt AND suspenders.
p.14 #8 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
ChurchGreen wrote:
Has anyone been able to test this lens with the 1.4TC yet?
Cheers
Simon
Received my 1.4 TC III and 200-500 last night. Won't have time to test until tomorrow unfortunately.
I was surprised by how light the 200-500 is though. Normally I use a 400 2.8 so by comparison it is very hand-holdable. I didn't get it until it was near dark outside though so no test shots as yet.
p.14 #9 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Got my copy today but did not really had much chance to do anything with it yet.
with Tc-20e iii, uncropped on D7100, af actually works much faster than I expected but the moon is pretty bright so it does not mean much but seems quite a bit faster than 300/4 pf with tc-20e iii anyhow. Too bad I won't be able to see the upcoming lunar eclipse this full moon in my part of the world
with [email protected], shot through the camera store glass door handheld at 1/125 with VR on. Just adjusted color temperature up a little bit and resize.
p.14 #10 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I took my 200-500mm f5.6E and D810 to the local state park for a second night in a row last night and had a great time. Being able to hand hold all night w/o monopod or tilt head definitely brings a new perspective to shooting. AF is not as fast as my 200-400mm f4G VR1 w/ or w/o TC and I have to babysit AF more (feels like I'm shooting Canon again ) but I'm still getting some stuff that makes me really happy.
The lens does GREAT for smooth BIF but tends to struggle with close erratic movement where the subject is rapidly changing distance from the lens. So I may get a few in-focus shots but at the sacrifice of the first image. So have I decided to sell my 200-400mm? Not yet...it is my favorite lens in the world but I see a place in my collection for both lenses. The only way I would sell my 200-400mm would be to fund a 500mm f4D AF-S II or 500mm f4G VR. The new 200-500mm will DEFINITELY be my first choice for shooting from a kayak given that it is much easier to handle and much easier to replace via insurance in the event that it goes in the drink.
Enough talking, here are some images of a very fast merganser from last night. All are heavily cropped:
Thanks for the link Mark. Looks pretty good with the TC compared to the bare lens, but hard to tell with the atmospherics. The star charts definitely look a lot sharper at 200mm than 500mm, unfortunately... Still, the lens seems to be holding up well against similar lenses, better IQ than the Sigma C and 80-400, though possibly a step down in most respects from the Sigma S. Are you thinking of picking one up? I'm hoping to grab one next month myself and give it a shot.
p.14 #14 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Lauchlan Toal wrote:
Thanks for the link Mark. Looks pretty good with the TC compared to the bare lens, but hard to tell with the atmospherics. The star charts definitely look a lot sharper at 200mm than 500mm, unfortunately... Still, the lens seems to be holding up well against similar lenses, better IQ than the Sigma C and 80-400, though possibly a step down in most respects from the Sigma S. Are you thinking of picking one up? I'm hoping to grab one next month myself and give it a shot.
I don't like the charts as much for evaluating IQ, because even the best primes look average on a test chart when you really get to the hardcore pixel peeping (basically what they are designed for though I guess haha). Every lens eventually loses it on a resolution chart. I much prefer looking at more "normal" images. All those shots were also 100% crops.
I can't figure out how to get Flikr to show me a full resolution image (I hate that website, but so many people use it haha), but it looks like the 1.4 TC doesn't do a whole lot to the IQ which is nice.
I am definitely considering buying one, but only after all the usual suspects release their complete reviews. Before the announcement, I was thinking about the Sigma 150-600S but the F6.3 and the weight are huge negatives for me. Looking at the available information though, the price/performance ratio seems to be extremely good for the Nikon so far. There isn't much to shoot around here in the winter so I will probably wait until Spring regardless haha.
I want to see more sample images closer to MFD, with a fairly close subject filling most of the un-cropped frame. That is how I would use the lens most of the time, and something I rarely see examples of from these super zoom threads.
p.14 #16 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I received my 200-500mm on Monday and played around with it a little with my D300s the first day. Decided to upgrade my D300s to a D7200 on Wednesday. Took my gear to work last night and on way home this morning saw this pair of Sandhill Cranes. Took with Nikon D7200, Nikon 200-500mm +TC14EII. These were handheld sitting in my car. I've included the original size of image and added a crop of the image also to help compare.
The only adjustment done is in camera sharpening of 4 and a clarity of +1 because I still hadn't figured out my camera setup and those were preset adjustments, other than that these are straight out of camera converted from RAW to JPEG without and further adjustments.
I'm impressed with the fast auto focus of the 200-500 with and without the TC and the IQ. Coming from the Nikon 300f4 AF-S and Nikon 70-200VR1 the 200-500 goes toe to toe with them IMO. Well worth the money especially being able to get the reach without shedding out thousands of dollars. Enjoy and hope this helps.
p.14 #20 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
I don't like the charts as much for evaluating IQ, because even the best primes look average on a test chart when you really get to the hardcore pixel peeping (basically what they are designed for though I guess haha). Every lens eventually loses it on a resolution chart. I much prefer looking at more "normal" images. All those shots were also 100% crops.
I can't figure out how to get Flikr to show me a full resolution image (I hate that website, but so many people use it haha), but it looks like the 1.4 TC doesn't do a whole lot to the IQ which is nice.
I am definitely considering buying one, but only after all the usual suspects release their complete reviews. Before the announcement, I was thinking about the Sigma 150-600S but the F6.3 and the weight are huge negatives for me. Looking at the available information though, the price/performance ratio seems to be extremely good for the Nikon so far. There isn't much to shoot around here in the winter so I will probably wait until Spring regardless haha.
I want to see more sample images closer to MFD, with a fairly close subject filling most of the un-cropped frame. That is how I would use the lens most of the time, and something I rarely see examples of from these super zoom threads....Show more →
Yeah, the charts definitely show the worst in a lens - even my beloved Sigma 105mm shows some flaws with those tests. A good way to compare lenses though, even if not flattering to them.
Flickr's pretty simple - click the download button in the lower right hand of the image, select "view all sizes" and then click "original" for the largest image to display. Or you can just download it by clicking the image size above "view all sizes."
I agree about the f6.3. It may only be a third of a stop, but every bit helps. Especially for sports - too bad it's a bit long for hockey unless you're in the bleachers. I'm most looking forward to hearing more from Brad Hill - he's become my favourite lens tester since he is very methodical and practical about it.
