p.26 #2 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Received my 200-500mm lens back from Nikon with the firmware update.
Everything seemed to be operating smoothly for the first 15 minutes then suddenly the camera and lens froze.
Had to remove and reinsert the battery to fix the problem.
May have to update the D810 firmware to see if this helps.
Has this happened to anyone with this combo?
Nevertheless, here are a couple of shots this morning.
The duck image is cropped, the others not so much.
p.26 #3 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
The above samples from Joe M. look every bit as good as anything I have seen out of a 100-400L at the sizes posted, with even better bokeh.
Canon has some beautiful bokeh machines like their 135mm and 85L, but I do find that most of their teles have nervous bokeh for some reason, even the 400mm f2.8 and other top notch lenses. Of course, some people might prefer that look, like the swirly bokeh of some Helios lenses. Textbooks and scientific works seem to eat those shots up.
But I would have to agree that from an artistic standpoint, Nikon seems to have an edge on tele bokeh. Brad Hill's acknowledged this in comparing the Nikon to the Sigma and Tamron, and he specializes in what I would call artistic wildlife photography rather than stock wildlife. Though the Sigma sport appears to have an advantage in AF, build quality, and sharpness, to be fair. It all comes down to what you want to accomplish with your photos and how much you're willing to spend (in both time and money).
p.26 #4 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Haven't shot with the Sigma, Tamron or Canon equivalents so can't offer an opinion.
What I can say is this Nikon 200-500mm lens is reasonably sharp.
Here are a couple more images from this afternoon.
The bride is at 330mm, the other two at 500mm.
The heron in flight at iso 2500 to get sufficient shutter speed.
All handheld.
p.26 #5 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I've just let my 300/2.8 VRII go as I want a 500/4 but until that happens (awaiting funds from a house sale - when we get around to selling it that is !) I need something to see me through the interim. I've been humming and hawing over the IQ, lack of micro-contrast and the fact it's a zoom (yes, I'm generally a prime & prejudice addict), I thought the 80-400G crap for birding. So until i re-checked Lance's shots on P22 I wasn't sold. I am now.
Now I just need his skill set. Do they come in a reasonably priced packet ?
p.26 #6 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I know some people, myself included, have been eagerly awaiting the results of Brad Hill's jaunt in the Great Bear Rainforest. Although the results are filtering through here are a couple of links so far :
Focus Tracking (Sigma 15-600 Sport)(400/2.8E VR), (200-500) and (80-400G).
Intersting to note that the 80-400G was blown away by the others. The Sigma and 200-500 very close and the 400/2.8 was his first ever lens to hit perfect ! That's over 100 shots each.
Here's two shots on the D4s comparing the 200-500 vs. 400/2.8, but note the 200-500 shot is at 7200 ISO and 400mm shot at 4000 ISO. Pretty damn good performance by the zoom (lovely bokeh too) !
Check out the second page for all the optical crops and comparisons with the Sigmas and Tamron.
Some notable excerpts :
The new lens surpasses the image quality of the 80-400mm at every focal length and gives you an additional 100mm on the long end.
All-in-all the lens is a very impressive performer near and far. It delivers sharper and more contrasty images than the competition in almost every comparison. And it shows quite a surprising performance in combination with the Nikon TC-14E III as every teleconverter magnifies the flaws of a lens.
The best image quality in its class combined with a reasonable price, a good image stabilization, and an acceptable size and weight earns Nikon's new 2.5x super-telephoto a Highly Recommended rating.
Good points
Very good quality over 36Mp full-frame, even wide open.
Good image stabilization.
Constant f/5.6 focal ratio.
Works well with 1.4x teleconverter.
Weather sealing.
Quiet, fast, and precise AF operation.
Maximum magnification of 1:4.0 in MF.
p.26 #11 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
"The new lens surpasses the image quality of the 80-400mm at every focal length and gives you an additional 100mm on the long end".
Not so. The 80-400 beats the 200-500 hands down at every single focal length between 80m and 199mm. For versatility, a lighter 5x zoom beats a heavier 2.5x zoom. And it's easier to take on a plane, too.
This is the full distance (40 yards plus) that I just could not get sharp images @ 400mm from the 80-400G. Without any FT or setup, I caught this mallard image from over 50 yards away, not a bad start for me.
p.26 #13 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
... And one more. For the 1st day, straight out of the box and popped onto my D810, for handheld w/o any fine tuning I am very, very happy with what I'm seeing already. And the lens, though bigger than my 80-400G, balances beautifully for handheld shooting. The VR really does seem to be as good as advertised by other users.
p.26 #14 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
An insane crop from a long shot. It was dark and cloudy yesterday afternoon, but came back satisfied. AF performed well, though not super-quick, in the nasty shooting conditions.
p.26 #16 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I'm very new to the Nikon family, but just wanted to post some sports images from the 200-500 from last weekend. I covered our team in a huge regional tournament in Kansas City, MO last week. I used the 200-500 mostly with a D7100 and was incredibly impressed with the auto focus tracking. I was in the 'sony camp' for the past 4 years, and had to shoot a manual focus 300 f4 at sporting events. Being able to simply follow the action with the Nikon autofocus was incredible and greatly, greatly increased my hit rate. I was really impressed with the zoom also, and how versatile it can be when covering sports. (my son is the goal-keeper in aqua...)
p.26 #17 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
ibbo wrote:
"The new lens surpasses the image quality of the 80-400mm at every focal length and gives you an additional 100mm on the long end".
Not so. The 80-400 beats the 200-500 hands down at every single focal length between 80m and 199mm. For versatility, a lighter 5x zoom beats a heavier 2.5x zoom. And it's easier to take on a plane, too.
my 2c
PI
Not at 401 -500mm and not with a TC (I had the 80-400G and hated it for birding in low light at dawn/dusk and especially with a TC where it would ratchet in and out for ages trying to find focus). I think the 80-400 would also struggle to make 700/8 and 1000/11 (even if the latter is MF only). And it most certainly doesn't beat it for the price.
I'm also not sure what 'versatility' and 'easier to take on a plane' has to do with the 200-500. I take my 300/2.8 and TCs on planes all over the world. Not an issue there and the 200-500 is lighter and smaller. You don't buy a sports/wildlife lens for versatility except within a narrow band.
I loved my 80-400G for traveling. Fantastic range for a tourist. Ultra sharp too. However as a wildlife/birding lens it was a failure for me (not all birds are within 10m) and clearly these lenses are targeting different users. The 200-500 is for sports/wildlife so TBH I don't really see this as a valid comparison but the comments I quoted above are interesting nonetheless.
