200-500f5.6 Priced Under $1,400: Are You Excited?

heartyfisher

I have no intention of looking at the 300mm f4 PF - I'm not that stupid

) yup I dont even "see" it on the shelves in the local camera shops ... nope it does not exist ...

donaldejose

proudgeek: I have been thinking the same thing and even more so now that the D500 will soon be out. A 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter offers so many options if you have both FX and DX bodies. Of course, the 200-500 zoom is more convenient but the prime with teleconverter will give you two stops more light on the sensor and likely is sharper when shot without a teleconverter.

heartyfisher

8-} ( I have a TC14 and a TC17 ) 8-} .... :-$ =P~ :-\"

proudgeek

proudgeek: I have been thinking the same thing and even more so now that the D500 will soon be out. A 300mm f2.8 with a 1.4x or 1.7x teleconverter offers so many options if you have both FX and DX bodies. Of course, the 200-500 zoom is more convenient but the prime with teleconverter will give you two stops more light on the sensor and likely is sharper when shot without a teleconverter.

I have shot the 300 with all three teleconverters (the 1.7 was when I was using a D90 body) and have been pretty happy. Yes, the focus is a tad slower and yes, the bokeh can sometimes have a strange quality, and yes, I do notice light falloff in the corners (although I'm frequently cropping anyway). But until I win the lottery or the Nikon fairy descends from the skies and gently places a 600 f/4 in my lap this is what I've got to work with.


That said, a D500 with the 200-500 in great light would be a great birding set up, particularly if you're hiking.

Sports

"200-500 f5.6 Priced Under $1,400: Are You Excited?"
I would have been ..... but in Denmark, it's just above $2000, and I'm sooooh close to pulling the trigger on a Sigma 150-600 Sport at $1700. Nikon, for God's sake, your "new" European prices are ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure you're forgetting that there are actually competition in the market.
Sigma Sport: better build, easy firmware upgrades, goes to 600mm, just a tiny bit better performance on most parameters according to reviews
Nikon: easier to handle, 95% of the performance of the Sigma, an "E" lens, fixed f5.6, "it's a Nikon".
In the US (Sigma $2000), I would pick the Nikon, no doubt.
Here, I'll pick the Sigma Sport, but there's also the much cheaper Sigma "Contemporary" and Tamron to consider, both really, really good at their price point.

Photobug

@Sport - yes the cheaper Sigma and Tamron's are good alternatives. But, I tend to use certain lens a lot and keep them a long time. In my younger days I recycled lens every 3 to 5 years.

I have been to many local events and keep seeing and hearing Sigma and Tamron lens owners talking to the Tamron and Sigma reps about warranty work. Especially in the last year of a warranty.

As I said a few pages ago I spent 45 minutes holding and shooting both Sigma lens, the Tamy lens and the Nikon 200-500. Also talked to owners and looked at reviews of all lens except the new Nikon. Made my decision the end of December and will be ordering the Nikon went I get my IRA money at the end of the month. \:D/

heartyfisher

I have an old tamron 200-400 F5.6 and I have been itching to upgrade. So help me decide ?

1) The new lenses nikon/sigma/tamron all add VR. My question is how hand hold-able are they ? Does VR really add that much? wont you be toting a tripod anyway?

2) Tamron vs Nikon
2.1) Price. The Tamron 150-600 is less than 2/3 the price of the Nikon 200-500 here. Is it really worth the difference?
2.2) Range. The 200-500 only adds 100mm at the long end vs what I have already... the Tamron adds 200 at the long end and 50 at the short end. More significant .. no?
2.3) Reputation of Nikon vs Tamron.
2.4) Advantages of the Nikon? The Nikon sharper than the Tamron ? anything else?

3) I also already have a 70-200 F4 + TC17, gets me VR and most of the range. Used on DX its virtually the same range as the nikon/new tamron ... and lighter.

Photobug

@heartyfisher - your comments are good and your asking the right questions.

My impressions are from looking at the Nikon 200-500 twice and the Tamron 3 or 4 times. The Nikon actually felt more rugged than the 150-600 Tamron. I also like the fixed aperture of the Nikon lens.

I also have the TC17 and recently got the TC1.4. Assume they both would work with the Tamron but know they are good on the Nikon 200-500.

I also gave some thought about the 100mm reach advantage that the Tamron has over Nikon. Yes that is an advantage, but I can always switch from DX to the 1.2 for that extra reach if I need it.

As far as the 50 mm advantage. Not one for me or you since we both have 70-200 lenses.

Item 2.3 I'll take Nikon's reputation over Tamron. got to realize I had a Tamron 200-500 for six years and sold it right after the new Tamron was announced before the used price dropped.

The Tamron will work for most people, especially in bright light. In low light, the Nikon AF is better. From my perspective, its worth the few extra dollars for the Nikon lens.

heartyfisher

Thank you for your thoughts @Photobug .. good points.

I never considered the 200-500+TC17, hmmm .. will it work? what aperture would that be? F10?
I dont think the TC17 is recommended for the Tamron I will have to check that. The TC17 only works with a very select number of lenses. However, I do have a KenkoTC14 which works with just about any lense.

Any thoughts re the VR with such big lenses ?

haroldp

The tc-14eIII works very well on the 200-500, almost imperceptible loss of sharpness wide open and outstanding down 1/2 stop. A very usable 700mm f8.

Photobug

+1 to what haroldp said with the TC-14eIII.
Heartyfisher, your right the 200-500 becomes f10 and so long as the AF & Exposure system works at that aperture your in good shape. I do know that some DSLR's don't work at apertures F8 and higher.

heartyfisher

Went shooting some birds today ... lots of fun with my 70-200f4+ TC17 and D7200.
But I can see why people would like the 200-500 :-) it would be just about perfect for birding, I bit longer than I had would have been nice .. Hmm ... maybe when you have it you will want a longer lense LOL !!

Oh one quick question.. Will focus fine tuning work with the 70-200f4+TC17? I have done the AF fine tune with the 70-200F4 by itself.. but the combination of 70-200F4+TC17 seems to need a touch of AF fine adjustment. ie will adjusting 70-200F4+TC17 mess up the tuning done on the 70-200F4 by itself?

Ironheart

No, TC+Lens holds it's own slot in the memory. Usually TCs require fine-tune, due to the extra connections and tolerance.

heartyfisher

No, TC+Lens holds it's own slot in the memory. Usually TCs require fine-tune, due to the extra connections and tolerance.

Thats good to know.. will have a play at calibrating the pair on my D7200 :-)

dissent

I'm excited now. Mine's shipping today.

proudgeek

Hmm ... maybe when you have it you will want a longer lense LOL !!

Lenses are like boats. You always want the size larger than the one you have. I'm shooting at 600mm and am still wishing I could get closer.

donaldejose

I'm shooting at 600mm and am still wishing I could get closer.

This is a good argument for why the D500 should sell well to wildlife photographers.

Photobug

I'm excited now. Mine's shipping today.

Lucky you. Looking forward to your "first impressions" and post to PAD with the new "tool". I expect to order mine near the end of the month when my funds become available.

Photobug

"longer is always better"...where have I heard that one before. ) )

pictureted

I have both the 70-200/4 and the 200-500/5.6 and both work with the TC1.4, but I find reverting to single point AF with my D810 reduces usefulness. I prefer using my D7100, if I want extra reach. I've pre-ordered the D500 to get that extra reach and improved AF. I have the TC2.0, but almost never use it because of the loss in IQ and speed. I don't have the TC1.7, so I can't comment.

The VR on the 200-500 is the best I've encountered and I consistently get useful shots at 500mm and 1/45th. I previously coveted the super telephotos, but now look at them as expensive albatrosses - too expensive and too big and heavy for me to ever want to buy or use.

I prefer fixed aperture zooms, but I don't care as much with wide-zooms (10-24DX) or mid zooms (16-85DX and 24-85VR) than I do with tele's (70-300VR). Mostly because I'm much more likely to want to shoot long lenses wide open and shoot the others stopped down for DOF.

heartyfisher

I'm shooting at 600mm and am still wishing I could get closer.

This is a good argument for why the D500 should sell well to wildlife photographers.

I didnt understand this ... until I assumed that you shoot 600mm with FX.. yes?

heartyfisher

Very nice review from Photography life !!
The summary and conclusions seems reasonable .. as he mentions .. the D500 will probably play an important role in the decision esp with Niki+TC17 ..

https://photographylife.com/nikon-200-500mm-vs-tamron-150-600mm-vs-sigma-150-600mm-c

proudgeek

I'm shooting at 600mm and am still wishing I could get closer.

This is a good argument for why the D500 should sell well to wildlife photographers.

I didnt understand this ... until I assumed that you shoot 600mm with FX.. yes?

You're correct. I do shoot FX. I will occasionally shoot in 1.2 crop mode to boost the frame rate. I do like retaining the ability to crop. Am considering a 500 f/4 with a TC1.4, but not quite yet. Does 720 vs. 600 really make that much of a difference?

heartyfisher

720vs600 probably not .. I have a 1.4 TC and now a 1.7tc although my zoom lense +1.4TC was nice, the trouble of attaching a TC and losing a stop was I felt too much trouble for the gain in reach which I can get by cropping. However, the TC17 seems to me to provide substantial enough reach to be worth the effort and loss of aperture and AF, to me anyway... so for me 720vs600 will probably be not worth the effort :-)

paulr

This image taken today witha D810 Nikon 300 2.8 Mk 11 with a 2x mk 111 Converter. The dog was moving fast from a small lake, but the lens picked up details of the spilling water.

F9 1/1000 IS0 2000