p.85 #4 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Lance and Slopoki, very nice results!
Some pages ago there was some "disbelieving" on the use of the 200-500/5.6 with the TC14E.
Last week finally I performed an AF-tune for this combo (for my D7200 it needs -10) and I am more than satisfied with the results, even wide open.
Some samples, all wide open at f/8 and hand held - the VR is stupendous:
p.85 #6 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Moose feeding in Grand Teton National Park DSC_0093.jpg by Jimmy, on Flickr
Nikon D600 Nikon 200-500mm @ 500mm 1/1000 @ f/18 ISO 1600 Vanguard monopod
Foxglove DSC_0495-HDR.jpg by Jimmy, on Flickr
D600 Nikon 200-500 @ 260mm 1/800 @ f/5.6 ISO 1250 Vanguard monopod
North Point Lighthouse Cape Disappointment State Park, Washington DSC_0416.jpg by Jimmy, on Flickr
D600 Nikon 200-500 @ 500mm 1/1000 @ f/11 ISO 800 Vanguard monopod
p.85 #7 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
asiostygius wrote:
Lance and Slopoki, very nice results!
Some pages ago there was some "disbelieving" on the use of the 200-500/5.6 with the TC14E.
Last week finally I performed an AF-tune for this combo (for my D7200 it needs -10) and I am more than satisfied with the results, even wide open.
Some samples, all wide open at f/8 and hand held - the VR is stupendous:
D7200 at 1.3x crop mode + TC14EII + Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E @ 464mm (= 280-700mm f/8 @ 650mm), hand held, ISO 1000, f/8 at 1/400s VR on; 29% cropped (4.5/15.4Mp), or in fact 19% cropped (4.5/24Mp).
Is the new TC14EIII visibly better than the older TC14E or TC14EII?
Is there some side by side "scientific" comparisons with the 200-500?...Show more →
All are great, but that last image is quite astounding considering the TC, it's cropped, the slow shutter speed compared to focal length!
p.85 #9 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Lance B wrote:
All are great, but that last image is quite astounding considering the TC, it's cropped, the slow shutter speed compared to focal length!
Thanks Lance. I was surprised too, specially after AF-tunning, which I suppose is mandatory to perform when using any TC. And I don't get tired to express my amazement on the VR capabilities of this zoom.
p.85 #13 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
birdied wrote:
Oh what amazing shots on this page gentlemen !!! Just wonderful .
I hesitate to add my contribution to this page .
Birdie
I for one, am glad you added your contribution today! I love the look of these images as they have the look of being made by an artist The focal point has plenty of detail and looks beautifully balance against the watercolor feel of the background. I feel it is very well done and would be proud to have this on my wall
Sometimes peoples images are hyper-detailed throughout the entire photo... can be nice at times, but can also make me feel fatigued too. Your examples here make me relaxed when viewing and find it very enjoyable to do so
p.85 #14 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
^^ Great shots. I think reducing the blacks, setting a black point, or adding a touch of de-haze would really make those pop.
Thanks so much Mark. I have reset the black point and played a bit with the white , and reposted. I think they do "pop" more now.
I have a bad tendency to overdo the contrast when I do post, so in an attempt to not go overboard, I now seem to go too much in the other direction. I really don't like what Lightroom does to convert the colors. I find I end up setting things to camera neutral and try and work from there.
p.85 #15 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
No Regrets wrote:
I for one, am glad you added your contribution today! I love the look of these images as they have the look of being made by an artist The focal point has plenty of detail and looks beautifully balance against the watercolor feel of the background. I feel it is very well done and would be proud to have this on my wall
Sometimes peoples images are hyper-detailed throughout the entire photo... can be nice at times, but can also make me feel fatigued too. Your examples here make me relaxed when viewing and find it very enjoyable to do so ...Show more →
Don, you are so very kind Thank you so very much. I must be going through some sort of phase with the backgrounds. I find myself really playing with what is there and trying to make it more like I saw in in my minds eye when I took the shot. When I am so focused on the subject, everything around it becomes a blur.
p.85 #18 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
Lance B wrote:
^^Great results, Mark!^^
Unfortunately, the aperture doesn't seem to be in the EXIF?
Thanks - I am stunned by how good this lens is for the price. I have some very similar pictures from my 300/4 and 70-200 VR II, I opened them up side-by-side and was very hard pressed to tell a difference in sharpness, if at all.
The auto exif built into FM doesn't seem to work, but it should be intact (shows up with the Firefox plug in I use). Anyways, everything is wide open at F5.6 except for the snow monkey shot which was at F6.3. All handheld and not too heavy to walk around with all day. I like that you don't need to stop it down to F8 to get proper sharpness, it seems to really shine wide open.
p.85 #19 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
CanadaMark wrote:
Thanks - I am stunned by how good this lens is for the price. I have some very similar pictures from my 300/4 and 70-200 VR II, I opened them up side-by-side and was very hard pressed to tell a difference in sharpness, if at all.
The auto exif built into FM doesn't seem to work, but it should be intact (shows up with the Firefox plug in I use). Anyways, everything is wide open at F5.6 except for the snow monkey shot which was at F6.3. All handheld and not too heavy to walk around with all day. I like that you don't need to stop it down to F8 to get proper sharpness, it seems to really shine wide open.
" I am stunned by how good this lens is for the price."
Isn't this the truth... my 200-500VR required almost no AF fine-tuning on my D500 (-2) and it beat the performance of my 200-400mm @ 400mm when both were shot wide open (400mm f4 vs 400mm f5.6). When I shot both at f/5.6 side by side (same camera type/subject/exposure) I could not tell the difference! I was so impressed with the 200-500VR, I sold my 200-400VR, bought another 200-500VR for my wife and used the extra cash to buy a super-clean 300mm f2.8 AFS vII for low light situations.
It continues to surprise me that Nikon managed to make this lens and price it the way they did. I sincerely believe that if they added a bit more weather sealing, nano-coating, and a pro-style hood, they could have sold these for $2200 and people would still consider the lens to be a great value!
I've attached a few from Iceland... shot with a D7100
bruce
p.85 #20 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
OwlsEyes wrote:
" I am stunned by how good this lens is for the price."
Isn't this the truth... my 200-500VR required almost no AF fine-tuning on my D500 (-2) and it beat the performance of my 200-400mm @ 400mm when both were shot wide open (400mm f4 vs 400mm f5.6). When I shot both at f/5.6 side by side (same camera type/subject/exposure) I could not tell the difference! I was so impressed with the 200-500VR, I sold my 200-400VR, bought another 200-500VR for my wife and used the extra cash to buy a super-clean 300mm f2.8 AFS vII for low light situations.
It continues to surprise me that Nikon managed to make this lens and price it the way they did. I sincerely believe that if they added a bit more weather sealing, nano-coating, and a pro-style hood, they could have sold these for $2200 and people would still consider the lens to be a great value!
I've attached a few from Iceland... shot with a D7100
bruce ...Show more →
Great shots.
I've yet to buy a lens that requires AF tuning, and my copy of the 200-500 is no exception. If yours requires -2, that is within the tolerance of the PDAF system, and you may consider just putting it back at zero unless you can really notice it. That is an extremely small adjustment - obviously do whatever works for you though.
I think that if Nikon put the 200-500 optics in a 200-400 body, sealed it with an internal zooming mechanism, added Nanocoating, a CF hood, and threw in a professional grade AF motor, it would be selling for a lot more than $2200 I'm glad they went the other way with it. Build quality is still excellent, the VR is better than any other lens I'm aware of, AF is fast and very accurate (not the fastest I've used but still more than enough for BIF or most action headed toward the camera on a capable body.) It has nice build quality touches like a rubberized front, and the stock lens foot is good. It's definitely right up there with the F1.8 primes for value proposition.
The focal point has plenty of detail and looks beautifully balance against the watercolor feel of the background. I feel it is very well done and would be proud to have this on my wall 
Thank you so very much. I must be going through some sort of phase with the backgrounds. I find myself really playing with what is there and trying to make it more like I saw in in my minds eye when I took the shot. When I am so focused on the subject, everything around it becomes a blur.
