p.2 #1 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
andreasb wrote:
AF speed; the two Canon lenses are significantly faster then the 200-500, obviously the 400 DO II is the fastest. The 200-500 is to slow an AF for me, would work great for stationary objects but I would not want it for moving subject like birds.
Lots of BIF and head-on action shots with the 200-500 kicking around - maybe it was a camera setting causing it to focus slower than normal. It's not as fast as the exotics of course, but it's not slow either - that seems to be the consensus.
p.2 #4 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Yes your right, I don't care about labels on gear, just whether it's good or not, which is why I own Canon, Olympus, Pentax, Sigma and Tamron gear.
Peddle your crap elsewhere
No need to get belligerent, Cobber.
A friendly word of advice from an old school ad agency guy… if you want your words to carry any credibility, don't advertise the fact that you work for the competitor of the product you're slagging off.
p.2 #6 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
"You" could mount them both on a Sony body, too. With a little more rigor, and comparable focus, proper tripod, and the same processing, it might be a reasonable test scenario. The we could cross post it on the Sony forum and add a whole new set of fans.
p.2 #7 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Abbott Schindl wrote:
Actually, the two lenses could both be tested on the same body. There are several Nikon-to-Canon adapters available. Expensive, and Nikon lenses are fully manual when used with them, but I've got one and it works great with every Nikon lens I've tried it with on my 1DIV, including a PC-Nikkor, Micro Nikkor and even the way-old PB-4 bellows.
But you can't mount a Canon lens on a Nikon body AFAIK. What makes the Nikon-on-Canon body possible is that Canon's mirror and sensor are farther back from the lens mount than Nikon gear, and Novoflex and others have taken advantage of it....Show more →
I don't think Nikon E lenses can be used with an adapter, the aperture is electronic like Canon EF lenses.
p.2 #8 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Imagemaster wrote:
You're welcome. VR on, not that it matters at those shutter speeds.
Tony
Tony, VR may matter more than you think. Thom Hogan and others have done some analysis to indicate that it should be off if the shutter speed is fast enough. Here's a link to Thom's article...
I used to have a link to a site with lots of test shots but it seems that I've lost it.
I expect that if there's going to be a problem then it will very likely show up more at 400mm and longer focal lengths rather than say 100-200mm. It might even be aggravated by very short delays between pressing the button and when the shutter starts to move. Either way, people who spend more money to get "better" gear (longer, sharper lenses, faster cameras and bigger printers) are more likely to see the problem if they look hard enough (my opinion, not Thom's).
Personally, I prefer IS - one that doesn't re-centre the IS lens group when the shutter button is pressed, which is what VR always does, and one that provides a more stable viewfinder image than VR does.
p.2 #9 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
No it was not the settings, I tried them all. Both on Cameras and the Lens. The lens was clearly slower then both the Canon lenses on the 7DMKII And no I'm not a Canon Fan Boy I shoot both systems now but have shot Nikon for many many years, with all Nikons big lenses (except the 800mm). I'm just reporting what I experienced. BTW a buddy of mine reported the same slowness with a different lens and he has a D810 and D7200. YMMV and we all have different expecations, but for me that doesn't work
It could however perform faster with more modern bodies then what I have but I really doubt that, the AF motor speed in the lens does not get faster on a new body. There was nothing wrong with the AF accuracy and sharpness, very good.
p.2 #11 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Abbott Schindl wrote:
Actually, the two lenses could both be tested on the same body. There are several Nikon-to-Canon adapters available. Expensive, and Nikon lenses are fully manual when used with them, but I've got one and it works great with every Nikon lens I've tried it with on my 1DIV, including a PC-Nikkor, Micro Nikkor and even the way-old PB-4 bellows.
But you can't mount a Canon lens on a Nikon body AFAIK. What makes the Nikon-on-Canon body possible is that Canon's mirror and sensor are farther back from the lens mount than Nikon gear, and Novoflex and others have taken advantage of it....Show more →
You could do it, but you can't set the aperture on an E-series lens on an adapter (as others have pointed out), so presumably you would have to use the Nikon lens wide open.
Feb 03, 2016 at 11:11 AM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.2 #12 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
It seems to me that for the price, the new Nikon is a real hit. Short of expensive exotics.
p.2 #13 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Considering a D500 + either 200-500 or Sigma 150-600C. My Canon mount 150-600C has been a revelation even being sharp wide open at 600mm and even sharper if 550mm or less is used. Extra 100mm is nice, but it would come down to AF performance in tracking as to which I'd choose as it looks like IQ is a non-issue with these lenses. On the 1DX the Sigma does very well with fast action, although it's not super fast it's reliable. I've used it for surfing and it handled some very fast action with aplomb.
p.2 #16 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Alan321 wrote:
Tony, VR may matter more than you think. Thom Hogan and others have done some analysis to indicate that it should be off if the shutter speed is fast enough.
I thought Nikon got over this issue, where VR can actually be detrimental at higher shutter speeds? Something also seen with Tamron's VC...
p.2 #17 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
molson wrote:
You could do it, but you can't set the aperture on an E-series lens on an adapter (as others have pointed out), so presumably you would have to use the Nikon lens wide open.
Now that Nikon is embracing electronic apertures, fully electronic adapters to E-mount can be produced, and I know that there is at least one in work (as well as one with an actuator for those with aperture linkage to the body).
p.2 #18 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Considering a D500 + either 200-500 or Sigma 150-600C. My Canon mount 150-600C
Me too! Although I will probably/ maybe wait until next November to buy a D500 at a discount? The $1,995 list is a bit pricey, and my main season is December through April here in Florida.
I am shooting this winter with a Canon 7DII and a Sigma 150-600 C. I love the ergonomics on the 7DII, but the D500 ups the ante a bit, while adopting some of the best 7DII features. Like the wide spread of the AF points, the dedicated AF control pad and the AF control joystick.
+++
I have been shooting Nikon, Canon, and Sony side-by-side for 7+ years now. I sold my D7100 about 15 months ago to buy a Canon 7DII for last winter season, but I kept my D5300. If the D7200 had been out at the time I would have probably just stayed with Nikon.
In July I sold my 7DII kit to try to go all Nikon, with a D750 and my D5300., I finally gave up on the D750 in December and bought another 7DII. I just couldn't adapt to the D750 ergonomics, although I loved the sensor for portraits and events.
I have chronic pain, as well as numbness, in both hands. I couldn't adapt to the D750 with all of the dedicated, non-programmable buttons scattered around the body. I can't feel teh buttons, and moving my hands around hurts.
In contrast, I can control all of the important shooting settings on my D5300 and the 7DII completely using only the rear control pad and the OK button. I can change the ISO, WB, Drive (single or continuous), Picture Profile, number of AF points, AF mode (single shot or continuous), metering mode, etc. all from the rear Info screen. I never change most of the limited items on/ the D750 Info pop-up menu, like Quality (always Jpeg+RAW), Active D lighting (always off), etc.
I am hoping that the D500 will allow me to change all of the same settings using the touch menu. I suppose I better download the manual now to check ...
p.2 #19 · Canon 100-400 II compared to Nikon 200-500
Pixel Perfect wrote:
Considering a D500 + either 200-500 or Sigma 150-600C. My Canon mount 150-600C has been a revelation even being sharp wide open at 600mm and even sharper if 550mm or less is used. Extra 100mm is nice, but it would come down to AF performance in tracking as to which I'd choose as it looks like IQ is a non-issue with these lenses. On the 1DX the Sigma does very well with fast action, although it's not super fast it's reliable. I've used it for surfing and it handled some very fast action with aplomb.
One should also consider which will work better with a TC. The D500 may handle AF better with a TC. Will have to wait and see.
