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

DaveyJ

I will wait and for a long time.....Not on my must absolutely have list now.....I have to keep real in terms of expenditures....

birdman

To those interested (count me in if all turns out good on reviews and no flaws)

It’s a foreign site, but sample shots and origs that can be downloaded.

http://www.megapixel.cz/nikon-200-500mm-f-5-6-e-ed-vr/recenze

DaveyJ

This is to me one of Nikon's get real releases! Like Birdman I will follow this lens. However I have one big difference from Birdman. If you are photographing primarily wild birds you need long glass. I do more landscape and work related photos now. However when you need long say 80-400 VR the new one seems pretty close to right. But the PRICE on that lens is sooooo high for me in "retirement" I work as many hours now.....but 20 times less income. Nikon's new 80-400 is right up there. Another issue......I ALWAYS stop down to f8 or so IF AT ALL POSSIBLE!

moreorless

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.

MTF's tend to suggest it will beat the 80-400mm for sharpness but really I don't think your looking at the same market given the difference in size and 80mm vs 200mm. The 80-400mm is really aimed at an all in one tele lens for things like holiday shooting where as the 200-500mm is aimed more specifically at wildlife/sport shooting.

Surely the big issue relative to the Tamron and Sigma long range zooms besides sharpness is going to be autofocus? the Tamron 24-70mm VC I own does a good job for the kind of uses I put it to but the AF is not great and I would want something a lot better for a long tele that would be used for wildlife shooting.

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.

MTF's tend to suggest it will beat the 80-400mm for sharpness but really I don't think your looking at the same market given the difference in size and 80mm vs 200mm. The 80-400mm is really aimed at an all in one tele lens for things like holiday shooting where as the 200-500mm is aimed more specifically at wildlife/sport shooting.

Surely the big issue relative to the Tamron and Sigma long range zooms besides sharpness is going to be autofocus? the Tamron 24-70mm VC I own does a good job for the kind of uses I put it to but the AF is not great and I would want something a lot better for a long tele that would be used for wildlife shooting.

We will have to see what the comparison is really like. I hope you are right.

Regarding your 80 vs 200 comment, I fell the 200-500 is a much better fit for most folks as most of us have something up to 200 already so the 80-400 has too much overlap.

For sure the big disappointment with non-OEM lenses is the autofocus and no matter how good a lens is in good light, if it can't focus reliably in dim light, it is no use to me. I have no experience of long Sigmas or Tamrons, just short ones.

moreorless

Regarding your 80 vs 200 comment, I fell the 200-500 is a much better fit for most folks as most of us have something up to 200 already so the 80-400 has too much overlap.

For sure the big disappointment with non-OEM lenses is the autofocus and no matter how good a lens is in good light, if it can't focus reliably in dim light, it is no use to me. I have no experience of long Sigmas or Tamrons, just short ones.

Again to me it seems like the 80-400mm would be aimed at someone who probably only wants to carry one tele zoom but also wants that entire range but I'd agree the 200-500mm seems potentially the more popular lens.

AF for me depends a lot on the kind of lens your looking at, as I said I don't really consider my 24-70mm Tamron's AF to be that much of a weakness but I very rarely shoot anything moving fast with it, perhaps people shooting events or children would feel different. With a 200-500mm lens though you'd image almost everyone who uses it would be shooting fast moving subjects so the AF is potentially a big issue.

Actually a very interesting lens for me as I'v been selling my landscape work for the past couple of years and I have considered trying to get into wildlife shooting without breaking the bank.

Photobug

@moreless - there are lots of lower cost options for wildlife. I have successfully used TC 1.7X and 1.4X with excellent results on a Nikon 70-200 F2.8 lens. Last year I sold my Tamron 200-500mm lens and was planning on buying the new Tamron 150-600mm lens next year. Now I am waiting on the lab and handling test results for the 200-500 F5.6.

haroldp

If tests look good, I will likely use the 200-500 for local birding, but take the 80-400 and TC if airplane travel is involved since it is smaller / lighter and one less lens is needed to fill the gap.

.... H

PB_PM

Yes, the 200-500 F5.6 has a totally different usage than the 80-400 which is more general purpose. Nikon released this lens to hold onto wildlife shooters who have been moving to third parties in droves.

I really like the idea, because I could shed over 1KG from my bag from switching from the Sigma 120-300mm F2.8 with 1.4x and 2x TC's if this lens works out well. I loose a stop (I always use the 1.4x TC at the least) and gain a little flexibility. I highly suspect that the Nikkor will be sharper than the Sigma with the 2X TC at 500mm.

spraynpray

I will wait and for a long time.....Not on my must absolutely have list now.....I have to keep real in terms of expenditures....

Ditto. I couldn't have put it better.

esquilo

Today I use Nikon 70-300 and Sigma 150-500 on my D7100.
When Tamron launched their 150-600 everyone was all over it. I compared it to my 150-500 and found that on a DX body there is not much difference appart from the extra 100 mm in the long end. The new Nikon AF-S 80-400 got me more excited. That's one lens that can replace both my 70-300 and my 150-500 in a single package, but the price is discouraging. Then Nikon releases this 200-500 that is half a stop faster at 500 mm and is also speculated to be significantly sharper. So, now I'm really confused.

Snowleopard

I know about watching expenditures, that is why some of the lenses I have, I bought used at dealers I trust to save some money, but slowly, over time I have bought the newer versions new.

The other thing I have learned, and while on a 200-500mm it may not be as important, is that I only want F/0.95, F/1.4,F1.8,F/2.8 glass. Every F/3.5-5.6 or F/5.6 low end lens I have owned has been disappointing .

Can't afford a new F/1.4, buy a used one and save 25-45% depending on the condition of the lens.

This 200-500 being a 5.6, but then no Nano coatings, or FL treatment because it has a 95mm front element...... Bad Nikon...... really......

Ironheart

The sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 weighs 35lbs (16kg) and costs $26,000
The nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 weighs 4.60lbs (2090g) and costs $1,400

You sure you want f/2.8? The reality of fast super telephotos is they get big and heavy and expensive quickly as the focal length increases.

pictureted

B&H will start shipping the week of September 21. I'm happy to be in the first batch.

Years ago I dreamed of the 400/4.6, but at over $1400 in 1982 that was just too much to afford. Early word is that this new zoom is sharp in the center at 500/5.6 and that's good enough for me. If it does more, so much the better.

Lens speed at 5.6 is more than adequate for my use. I prefer the images taken in good light with subject DOF often requiring f8 or f11. If I needed images in low light, shot sports or had the hots for ultra-thin DOF, I wouldn't buy this, but those aren't my requirements. I also prefer smaller and lighter if given the choice (70-200/4 vs f2.8).

shootnikonfx

Pictureted the B&H people told me about the same. Initial shipment to arrive Sept 24th then a couple of days to send to customers.

RocketRog

Picked up new 200-500 today (official retail seller in Australia). This lens is for my wife (has D700) who didn't want a heavier lens. I'll shoot a comparison this weekend on my D810 against the Sigma 150-600S, a Nikon 80-400 VR, a Nikon 300 f4, and a Tamron SP500 f8 mirror lens. My guess is that anyone wanting this lens (or the Sigma or the 80-400) is really looking for the longer end of the range so I'll just shoot at 300/400/500/600 wide open. Ha, that's f8 on the 30 year old Tamron, but it's the lightest and cheapest, and excellent for moon, sunrise, sunset shots.

heartyfisher

Cool ! another aussie .. rare breed on this forum :-)

Snowleopard

The sigma 200-500mm f/2.8 weighs 35lbs (16kg) and costs $26,000
The nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 weighs 4.60lbs (2090g) and costs $1,400

You sure you want f/2.8? The reality of fast super telephotos is they get big and heavy and expensive quickly as the focal length increases.

My camera back pack is already 55 pounds, whats' another 34 pounds, while I may not be happy about all the weight, I do allot of low light shooting and having the F/2.8's is nice.

What I find interesting about the new 200-500 F/5.6 as I said before...... The lens coatings....... No Nano Coatings, no FL coating on the front element (95mm)..... and

After looking at the photo's of it....... It does not have internal zooming so the lens gets longer as you zoom out.

I think its been a while since any decent Nikon lens has been an external zoom or push pull type zoom...... That is another con in my opinion of this new lens.....

Not saying I wouldn't pick one up at $1399 , I will need to see what it can do before it makes its way into my camera back considering what it is lacking.

donaldejose

Yes, it is missing some desirable features and that may limit some use in some conditions but for the price if it is sharp (and the coatings aren't needed to make it sharp) it will be very worthwhile.

DaveyJ

Of all the Nikon lens I have had to pass on due to my "retired" finances the Nikkor 80-400 is the one I would have liked to own. The price is simply too high for my photo ops now, which are decreasing. The 200-500 is a very big lens by my reckoning. But it will be interesting to see just how sharp this lens is.....I guess we will have a very good Australian review soon! Looking forward to RocketRog's next post!!!

jdphoto77

My 200-500 shipped out from B&H this morning! Looks like they're moving a bit early on some of the early orders!

BVS

After looking at the photo's of it....... It does not have internal zooming so the lens gets longer as you zoom out.

I think its been a while since any decent Nikon lens has been an external zoom or push pull type zoom...... That is another con in my opinion of this new lens.....

Aren't the Tamron and Sigma's all external zoom too? It may be just par for the course in this category of lens.

9viii

So far hands on reports are nothing but glowingly positive.
It's funny watching the negative responses though. I guess we're just finding out how disruptive the new class of compact superzooms really are now that Nikon has released one.

Photobug

Local dealer has one of the 200-500mm lens that shipped this week with 1 coming next week and 1 the week after that. They have 3 preorders so it looks like 4 to 5 weeks before they will have one for the shelf to show potential buyers.

Coastalconn

It's interesting, Tamron reacted very quickly and dropped the 150-600 down to $780 after rebate from Beach Camera via Ebay. So now the new Nikon lens is almost twice the price. I'm curious to see how the Nikon performs. Several people have already asked me on my FB page...