p.35 #1 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Trench, I'm probably missing something obvious, but why do you prefer not to use the DX framing on the D810? I don't use it either. In my case, I find it harder to frame the shot.
I also wonder if I've missed finding a camera setting that makes the area outside of DX or 1.2 settings in the viewfinder dark; it might make framing easier...
trenchmonkey wrote:
Short answer, no. You lose at least a stop, with slower AF as well. I personally never shoot the D810/800's
in DX mode but I'll do 1.2 for the 1 add'l fps. The beauty of this zoom is 500mm @f5.6 will yield prime-like
IQ. 100% crops are insane...
p.35 #2 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
I guess the question is if the TC in DX mode with a small crop will yield better results than a shot in DX mode with a larger crop.
trenchmonkey wrote:
Short answer, no. You lose at least a stop, with slower AF as well. I personally never shoot the D810/800's
in DX mode but I'll do 1.2 for the 1 add'l fps. The beauty of this zoom is 500mm @f5.6 will yield prime-like
IQ. 100% crops are insane...
Birdbrooks wrote:
Trench, I'm probably missing something obvious, but why do you prefer not to use the DX framing on the D810? I don't use it either. In my case, I find it harder to frame the shot.
I also wonder if I've missed finding a camera setting that makes the area outside of DX or 1.2 settings in the viewfinder dark; it might make framing easier...
Hi, Bill
Tough keeping a whole BIF in that tiny DX 'window' especially with a 500/600mm FL (FOV 750/900mm)
Pretty sure the end result is gonna be the same...shooting in DX or cropping later. I find 1.2 crop a happy
medium, easier to frame and knocks down the file size a tad...in addition to 20% more fps.
The setting you're missing is a6, just set it to OFF for da shading.
p.35 #3 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Thanks Will!
trenchmonkey wrote:
Hi, Bill
Tough keeping a whole BIF in that tiny DX 'window' especially with a 500/600mm FL (FOV 750/900mm)
Pretty sure the end result is gonna be the same...shooting in DX or cropping later. I find 1.2 crop a happy
medium, easier to frame and knocks down the file size a tad...in addition to 20% more fps.
The setting you're missing is a6, just set it to OFF for da shading.
p.35 #5 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Hi trench,
I am a Canon+Tammy 150-600 user and this Nikon 200-500 is really so tempting ,I might take the plunge,but before that just want your help in two points about the Nikon 200-500mm.
From the D7200 thread found out that you also handled the Sigma 150-600mm Sports.How would you compare the AF speed between the two..?
Also how you would rate an image from the Nikon 200-500 @ f5.6 at 500mm against the same shot with the Siggy 150-600 sports at f6.3 at 500mm...?
I might be using it with D7200 in low-light conditions,mostly (99%) handheld for photographing small birds.
p.35 #6 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
PIXPHATIC wrote:
Hi trench,
I am a Canon+Tammy 150-600 user and this Nikon 200-500 is really so tempting ,I might take the plunge,but before that just want your help in two points about the Nikon 200-500mm.
From the D7200 thread found out that you also handled the Sigma 150-600mm Sports.How would you compare the AF speed between the two..?
Also how you would rate an image from the Nikon 200-500 @ f5.6 at 500mm against the same shot with the Siggy 150-600 sports at f6.3 at 500mm...?
I might be using it with D7200 in low-light conditions,mostly (99%) handheld for photographing small birds.
Hello Anindya
The Sig Sport AF's faster than the Nikon 200-500...and via the dock even more
precise adjustments are possible (dependent upon the way you prefer to shoot)
The IQ's pretty close at 500mm wide open but I give the nod to the Nikon here. By f8
things even out but the difference is more pronounced on FX, more of a wash w/D7200
The Nikon zoom has better VR (OS) and is considerably lighter but the Sig Sport has the
weather/dust sealing and top shelf build. I've worked my D810/D7200's with each and have
finally settled into a preferred groove using the Sig Sport/D7200 for ultimate reach and the
Nikon 200-500/D810 for my lightweight close in BIF/rodeo combo. What great times to be
photographers, eh?! HTH, Will (welcome to FM, BTW)
p.35 #7 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
trenchmonkey wrote:
Hello Anindya
The Sig Sport AF's faster than the Nikon 200-500...and via the dock even more
precise adjustments are possible (dependent upon the way you prefer to shoot)
The IQ's pretty close at 500mm wide open but I give the nod to the Nikon here. By f8
things even out but the difference is more pronounced on FX, more of a wash w/D7200
The Nikon zoom has better VR (OS) and is considerably lighter but the Sig Sport has the
weather/dust sealing and top shelf build. I've worked my D810/D7200's with each and have
finally settled into a preferred groove using the Sig Sport/D7200 for ultimate reach and the
Nikon 200-500/D810 for my lightweight close in BIF/rodeo combo. What great times to be
photographers, eh?! HTH, Will (welcome to FM, BTW)...Show more →
p.35 #11 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Took the Nikon 200-500mm lens and a D750 to the north shore of Oahu to see how it handled big wave surfing. The good news is the lens is plenty sharp and light enough to handhold (and I'm really not that strong). The less than good news is the focus speed is not great - perfectly adequate, but just not great. My nikon V3 or J5 with a 70-300cx lens is faster. Nevertheless I'm still impressed with this lens and it would probably be amazing on a D7200 for a bit more reach. Here are a few surf shots all cropped and all at 500mm.
p.35 #13 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Just as a reference and for comparison sake. I was shooting at our local eagles nest this weekend and a buddy of mine was shooting next to me with the D7200 and Tamron 150-600. I was using a D7100 and the 200-500 with TC14 and we caught the same shot. If you look at the photos you can see the 200-500 with the TC at 700 is pretty much on par with the Tamron at 600. My shutter was slower since I was at f8 vs his f6.3. These are long shots from about 75-80 yards to the nest. These were both posted to FB and then downloaded from there so the IQ really suffers but you can get the idea.The pics are going to show up at 100% on your monitor unless you click on them to view.
p.35 #19 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Joe Marquez wrote:
Agree with many commentators heaping praise to Howard. This particular capture requires considerable photo skills, patience, bird knowledge and the right equipment. One other thing that strikes me is how extremely low the camera and lens must have been to get this angle. The kingfisher appears above the water horizon which makes this image even more special. Almost as if Howard was submerged in the water with the camera and lens just above the surface. Amazing.
p.35 #20 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
mmarconi wrote:
Roadside hawk, ~40% crop.
Great clarity here, Mike. If I may ask, did you have VR on or off for this shot?
Around 1/1000 and even a bit faster I'm on the fence myself about turning on VR with this lens.
Thanks! Bill
(Note to all: I have read Hogan's piece about VR and agree in most ways, but this is my first foray above 400 mm and that may have an impact on using VR. I was able to get better tracking photos of ducks last evening with it on; the biggest part of that is my getting used to the tighter framing.)
