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

Snowleopard

I am still on the fence about this lens... No nano coating or FL elements even though it is only an F5.6. And on Nikon's website, it says it will work with the TC-20 verion III (The new one) I would like to use this for some birding at 1000mm F 11.2 and shooting the moon at night.... I don't think the moon will be an issue because of how bright it is...

but F11.2 is going to be a problem for allot of camera's depending on how much light you have unless it is a D800/800E/810/D3/D4......

Ironheart

If it were an f/4 it would weigh almost 10lbs instead of 5lbs. Just sayin'

Snowleopard

If it were an f/4 it would weigh almost 10lbs instead of 5lbs. Just sayin'

And the Sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 EX DG APO IF weighs 34.54 lb (15.67 kg)? I don't think 10 lbs is an issue.

Ironheart

I'm just saying some people want the lighter weight and will take the smaller aperture.

haroldp

The new 500mm F4 is $ 11,000, and the old one is $ 8,000.

A 5 lb $1,400 lens is a very different use and market spot from a 10 lb $8,000 lens.

This is designed as an alternative to a 1.4 extender on an 80-400.

... H

spraynpray

The new 500mm F4 is $ 11,000, and the old one is $ 8,000.

A 5 lb $1,400 lens is a very different use and market spot from a 10 lb $8,000 lens.

This is designed as an alternative to a 1.4 extender on an 80-400.

... H

If it manages the same level of performance as the 80-400G, it will be a winner for sure.

Msmoto

This can be very useful in motorsports, especially when vehicles are approaching, one can zoom out and catch a side view. But, as has been noted, it must be as sharp as a 400mm f/2.8 or no go for me.

Oh, yes, with a TC-20EIII, shooting the moon....Looney Eleven....ISO 100, f/11, 1/100 or....

Snowleopard

So with this 200-500 F/5.6 are we going to see a refresh on the 200-400 F/2.8? and Will we ever see a 200-500 F/2.8 from Nikon? The way Nikon prices are going through the roof, they will reach the $25,000 price tag of the Sigma 200-500 F/2.8 in 12 months anyway......

If Nikon did a 200-500 F/2.8 for $25,000 and put FL, N, PF, maybe they could make it for 20-25 pounds instead of the 35 pounds of the sigma lens.....

PB_PM

Nikon doesn't make a 200-400mm F5.6 the last time I checked. Also, did you mean the 200-400mm F4G VRII? I suspect we'll see Nikon refresh all the telephoto primes (200mm F2, 300mm F2.8) before they get back to the 200-400mm F4.

Frankly I see no reason to get a 200-500mm F2.8. If I had that kind of cash I'd get the AF-S 800mm F5.6. It would be lighter without a doubt.

haroldp

A 400mm f4 based on the new 300 / f4 (lightened by flourite and pf elements) of high quality would be interesting to me, as well as a straight 500mm f 5.6 prime.

... H

Snowleopard

Nikon doesn't make a 200-400mm F5.6 the last time I checked. Also, did you mean the 200-400mm F4G VRII? I suspect we'll see Nikon refresh all the telephoto primes (200mm F2, 300mm F2.8) before they get back to the 200-400mm F4.

Frankly I see no reason to get a 200-500mm F2.8. If I had that kind of cash I'd get the AF-S 800mm F5.6. It would be lighter without a doubt.

:-) Thanks, fixed that, but seriously.... those lenses are $10,000-$17,000 each. I would rather take a 200-500 F/2.8 at those prices and have some flexibility....

PB_PM

Whatever works for you I suppose. If you are so eager, grab the Sigma, I doubt a Nikkor would be much smaller if they ever made one. Sure it might weigh less, but the physics required for light gathering won't.

DaveyJ

I have written probably one dozen letters to Nikon about this type of lens. Not once did I ever get a letter back.
However I did assume they didn't discount the idea and the marketability. From what I have seen on Nikon patents....this looks like the real deal! I might be a buyer!

DaveyJ

The price is DESIGNED to attract and Excite! Compared to the new 80-400? About 1/2 the price of the 80-400. The reason I don't own the 80-400 is price. The reason I might buy a 200-500 is price. It is pretty big compared to the 80-400. That is too bad for what I look for. Yet this is a lens that will sell well.....my prediction!

PB_PM

It is a good range, and drops the need to lug around teleconverters. I'm very tempted to order, but I'll wait considerings the long trail of early issues with recent releases.

spraynpray

I said earlier if it performs like the 80-400G it will be a winner - but seriously - it can't perform like the 80-400g or they would never sell another 80-400G given the lesser zoom range and greater price. I think we need to manage our expectations a little.

Don't get me wrong, if it does perform like the 80-400G, I am getting one! It will be interesting to see comparisons with the 150-600 Tamron. It needs to be better than that really - which would make it pretty good - otherwise the greater zoom range and lesser price of the Tamron will attract my money.

snakebunk

It must be better than what we expect from Nikon at this price.

spraynpray

It must be better than what we expect from Nikon at this price.

Not quite sure what you mean by that snakebunk?

To clarify my post: If it is like a 70-300VR and soft for the last 20% of its range, I'll get a Tamron. If it is no better than the Tamron, I'll get a Tamron for the extra range and lower price. If it is better than the Tamron, it will need to be enough better that purchasing it justifies the extra money and lesser range of the Nikon and I don't see that being possible AND it not being better or at least as good as the 80-400G.

Just being a realist is all.

snakebunk

@spraynpray: I think you clarified my post; we don't expect it to perform like the 80-400 and that is what it must do .

In Sweden the Nikon 200-500 is priced almost like the Sigma 150-600 Sports, so for me it would have to be sharper than that lense. If Nikon comes out with something spectacular, this could be a great lense for bird photographers with crop cameras.

spraynpray

Ah, I was talking about the Tamron 150-600 not the siggy sports. Here in the UK the Tamron is down to £799 inc tax and delivery.

snakebunk

That is a great price and similar to Sweden. The Nikon 200-500 is priced a lot higher. It is a tough market segment.

Snowleopard

So we have 5 days left..... Is anyone jumping on this one the day it comes out or are you going to wait few months to find out where it fails?

spraynpray

I'll wait I think. TBH a long lens is a niche requirement for me, I'd rather upgrade my old macro lens first.

NSXTypeR

I'll wait I think. TBH a long lens is a niche requirement for me, I'd rather upgrade my old macro lens first.

Off topic, but what would you upgrade to?

spraynpray

I have just bought the 60mm G to replace (perhaps) my old 60mm D because of the slow, noisy focus and the lens not being IF which my subjects find alarming. I don't like the approx 1" closer minimum working distance, but I do like the colours and sharpness of the G.

I tried the 105 but didn't like it for not being so easy to hand hold due to its excessive forward and heavy weight.