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

1356728

Comments

  • TriShooterTriShooter Posts: 219Member
    @sevencrossing and @snakebunk, I generally agree but keep in mind the relatively inexpensive Tammy 200-500mm, and their newer 150-600mm appear to me to be sharper toward their long end. In fact the Tamron 200-500mm blew by my old 300mm F4, with the TC-14, when shooting toward infinity, and the weight of the Tamron was extremely light compared to the Nikon 500mm F4.
  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited August 2015


    Slightly off topic: Has there ever been a variable (zoom) tele converter? It sounds like an interesting idea.
    there is a Vivitar 3x-4 Variable Auto Teleconverter on ebay

    Komura also seem to have made one
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,186Member
    edited August 2015
    There are many lenses that are sharper or just as sharp at the long end.. from Nikon or the third party.
    Its a false assertion that the wide end is sharper though its is in some lenses. a few example of lenses sharper at the longer end.. 120-300 Sigma F2.8, Nikon 24-70. as mentioned my 70-200 F4 is quite nice at 200mm..

    My 18-140dx is quite good through out the range. The 70-200 F4 is also really nice and sharp though out the range although the Bokeh is variable. From very awesome good to meh..

    Lenses that I know that are sharper at the wide end are 18-200 DX, 24-70 tamron, 35-70 F2.8 Nikon.. I think its just what was designed.. a zoom lens is not a lense + TC.

    Lenses with a bit of a dip in IQ in the middle are 24-120, 16-85. Tamron 24-70 F2.8.

    Its all in the design decisions made by the lense engineers..
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    I will keep an open mind on this topic. Interesting.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    It is under $1,400. Did the OP have a crystal ball?
  • SnowleopardSnowleopard Posts: 244Member
    I like the idea of a super zoom that is "more affordable" from Nikon, but since I have been looking at the 200 - 400 F/4, and all my lenses are F/1.4, or F/2.8, this is some what disappointing because you won't be able to affectively use a 2x TC on it.
    ||COOLPIX 5000|●|D70|●|D700|●|D810|●|AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED|●|AF Nikkor 20mm f/2.8D|●|AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D|●|AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G|●|AF Micro-Nikkor 60mm f/2.8D|●|AF-S Micro Nikkor 60mm f/2.8G ED|●|AF-S VR Zoom-NIKKOR 70-200mm f/2.8G IF-ED (Silver)|●|AF-S Teleconverter TC-20E III|●|PB-6 Bellows|●|EL-NIKKOR 50mm f/2.8||
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,186Member
    It is under $1,400. Did the OP have a crystal ball?
    I think its called google translate...

    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,186Member
    edited August 2015
    I like the idea of a super zoom that is "more affordable" from Nikon, but since I have been looking at the 200 - 400 F/4, and all my lenses are F/1.4, or F/2.8, this is some what disappointing because you won't be able to affectively use a 2x TC on it.
    But a 1.4 tc will work fine.. especially with a crop sensor camera.. I guess if you intend to use a 2x converter then the 200-400 F4 would be the lens for you or the 300 f4.

    For the BIF shooters its been the Canon 400F5.6 vs the Nikon 300F4 + TC1.4 now we have the 200-500 F5.6 to add to the mix, and including VR as well although for BIF it doesnt really add much especially for tripod shooters.

    I think this would be a great addition especially for DX shooters that want a bit of range. In that space it will be competing with the Tamron and Sigma 150-600. add a 1.4 TC and it beats the 3rd party for range.

    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • sevencrossingsevencrossing Posts: 2,800Member
    edited August 2015
    Most people seem agree TCs work well with primes
    but when it comes to TCs and zooms opinion seems dividend
    most reviews feel the 200 -400 is fine with 1.4 TC but few if any recommend it with a x2
    my gut feeling is with the 200-500f5.6 and a 24 mp Dx camera you would be better off cropping than using 1.4 TC
    Post edited by sevencrossing on
  • jdbjdb Posts: 32Member
    I just pre-ordered this 200-500 F/5.6 from my local shop. Looking forward to using it and providing feedback. I mostly photograph birds and have been using an old (no VR) AF-S 300 f/2.8 with teleconverters.
    D600, D7100, 300 f/2.8 AF-S, 300 f/4 ED-IF, 16-35 f/4 VR, 105 f/2.8 AF-S VR, 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR, 85 f/1.8D, 50 f/1.4D, 80-200 f/2.8 AF, 20 f/3.5 AI, TC 1.4 II, TC 2.0 III
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    I just pre-ordered this 200-500 F/5.6 from my local shop. Looking forward to using it and providing feedback. I mostly photograph birds and have been using an old (no VR) AF-S 300 f/2.8 with teleconverters.
    I wonder if you are downgrading?
  • jdbjdb Posts: 32Member
    Well, I'm keeping the old set up just in case... Part of the attraction of the 200-500 is the weight savings, VR, and little bit smaller size.
    D600, D7100, 300 f/2.8 AF-S, 300 f/4 ED-IF, 16-35 f/4 VR, 105 f/2.8 AF-S VR, 70-300 f/4.5-5.6 VR, 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 VR, 85 f/1.8D, 50 f/1.4D, 80-200 f/2.8 AF, 20 f/3.5 AI, TC 1.4 II, TC 2.0 III
  • picturetedpictureted Posts: 153Member
    I'm betting they optimized towards the long end of the range. 500/5.6 should prove useful and this is so much cheaper than other Nikon alternatives it's worth a try. If a wider range is good and/or it works with tc's so much the better.
    pictureted at flickr
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,286Member
    edited August 2015
    Interesting indeed- Nikon hasn't done a lens with such a slow aperture in a long time. The zoom range is pretty interesting, and it's relatively affordable- the 80-400 is almost 2x the price of this lens.

    Should be good paired up with a D7200, especially with the AF module that senses down to F8.

    Shucks, and I was thinking about splurging for a 70-300 VR. :D
    Post edited by NSXTypeR on
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,398Moderator
    This looks to be at least as sharp as the 300/2.8, especially if one adds the teleconverter to the 300. I may have to get this just for .....mmmm I will think of some reason...LOL.

    The size, when compared to the big guns, 400/2.8, 500/4, etc. primes, is a distinct advantage. Some times a 15 pound camera/lens set up gets heavy.....
    Msmoto, mod
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,186Member
    edited August 2015
    Its lighter than the Sigma sport 150-600 but similar in weight to the tamron and "C" version of sigma. and about half a cm longer :-) so its really the same size and weight. I was hoping that it would be smaller and lighter. which it kind of is if compared to the "S" version of sigma. Will have to wait for reviews as it seems too similar to make any decisions.. besides trusting that Nikon will give these tele-zooms the boot. (at least vs the Sigma C and the tamron)

    I have been considering the tamron for a while now.. but this 200-500 would complement my 70-200 f4 and 1.4 tc very nicely 200-500 + tc gets me 700 and on my D7200 would be rather nice ! rather nice .... I may have finally got an excuse to upgrade my old Tamron 200-400 F5.6.. may even go shooting dragonflies in flight again :-)
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

  • newfoundlander61newfoundlander61 Posts: 26Member
    For my type of nature/bird photography my choice would be the updated 80-400 nikon lense instead of this one.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    Why do you need such a long lens for dragonflies - what's wrong with a 60?

    Emperor Dragonfly
    Always learning.
  • BVSBVS Posts: 440Member
    Why do you need such a long lens for dragonflies - what's wrong with a 60?
    Wow! Very nice!

    Just curious, how close did you have to get for a shot like that?

    D7100, 85 1.8G, 50 1.8G, 35 1.8G DX, Tokina 12-28 F4, 18-140, 55-200 VR DX
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    edited August 2015
    I bet about 4 inches.
    Post edited by WestEndFoto on
  • picturetedpictureted Posts: 153Member
    Why do you need such a long lens for dragonflies - what's wrong with a 60?

    How about working distance? I've seen a wide-angle macro, but that doesn't mean it's a general solution or a good idea. The 60 is a fine lens (I have one), but certainly not optimal for field use with small critters in most circumstances. But then I guess you were just being a contrarian.
    pictureted at flickr
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    Hmmm......60mm on dragonflies???

    Can you imagine this from the dragonfly's perspective. Imagine a big massive round sphere filling up half the sky.

    I say that Spraynpray is either communicating telepathically with the dragonfly to keep it calm or he is using Raid.

    ;-)
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,545Moderator
    HAH! No, it is just knowing your subject and using that knowledge - I think you call it fieldcraft. I have been into insects since I was a kid and know what I can get away with under most circumstances. I was actually 3" away right on the limit of closest focus as it is 1:1 and so qualifies as a macro not a close-up shot.

    Normally there would be a massive light modifier beside the subject as well as the lens in its face.

    Why didn't it fly away this time? it was dark and cold as well as sheltering from a gale for the night. I saw it land and gave it time to settle down and then - apart from moving a heck of a lot in the wind (him and me) - we were golden.
    Always learning.
  • WestEndFotoWestEndFoto Posts: 3,742Member
    Well it is a great shot and it got explored, so congrats.
  • heartyfisherheartyfisher Posts: 3,186Member
    edited August 2015
    Why do you need such a long lens for dragonflies - what's wrong with a 60?
    Cos I am aiming for dragon fly in flight :-)... Yes field-craft does it ..
    Post edited by heartyfisher on
    Moments of Light - D610 D7K S5pro 70-200f4 18-200 150f2.8 12-24 18-70 35-70f2.8 : C&C very welcome!
    Being a photographer is a lot like being a Christian: Some people look at you funny but do not see the amazing beauty all around them - heartyfisher.

Sign In or Register to comment.