Re. Your comment “Why can’t Nikon make its tripod feet compatible with Arca-Swiss?” Perhaps because not everyone uses Arca type mounts? Nothing would persuade me to change from Manfrotto RC2. Nikon gives us the choice, what’s wrong with that?
K2_
January 16, 2021 9:08 am
Thanks for this comparison, i’ll get the nikkor 🙂
Jimmy
September 30, 2020 4:00 pm
This lens is almost perfect price/performance wise, if it weren’t for the sample variation, the lack of weather sealing and the lack of an arca-swiss compatible lens collar. The Tamron 150-600 G2 does have weather sealing and arca compatible lens collar, but the downside is that it is much softer near the edges and has significant vignetting on FF.
Michael
June 3, 2020 4:03 pm
Just one comment. Combined with the Z50 the 500-200 works excellently with the TC1.4 and TC2.0 converters. I did notice some tendency for back focussing and AF-Fine Tuning might be important to get the best out of the system. Actually after the AF-Fine-Tuning I use my system mostly with the 1.4 times converter getting really pleasant results. I take of the converter only in difficult light conditions. With the 2.0 converter I have mixed feelings – cropping into the picture of the 1.4 converter gives often better results.
This is absolutely no problem – I get very sharp images after doing the AF-Fine Tuning. I would call my 700 mm combination pixel sharp. The AF works reliably in all modes. VR of course as well. With the 2.0 times converter AF still works. However, the sensitivity towards light reflexes etc increases, the contrast decreases and the resolution as well. I also AF-Fine Tune at 500 mm only and I see clear improvement when stopping down the lens to F8, F11, and even F16 for the combinations with 500 mm, 700 mm, and 1000 mm, respectively. Nevertheless its possibly the fastest and most light weight solution to 1000 mm with AF and VR capabilities. With the crop factor of the APS-C sensor you get some amazing magnifications. Furthermore, as the sensor size is smaller the loss of resolution at the edges of the image is less. I do not know if I can upload images in the forum otherwise I would send you some test images.
Carl Galdos
June 1, 2020 1:59 pm
Oops — newbie with discussions — re: Nikon 200-500. I have been using it for a couple of years now, on a Nikon D7200, for nature (birds, wildlife) as well as Air Shows, quite often handheld — and it has given me wonderful results. As a newbie here, I don’t know how to post some examples — Birds, Foxes, Blue Angels, the Moon etc. Thank you. Love the website, comments and excellent advice.
Imtiyaz K
May 30, 2020 2:13 am
Hi Nasim, As always masterful analysis of the famed 200-500mm 5.6. Among the sample images which are of course great, I dint see any picture of a bird in flight that can give a fair indication of speed of focus acquisition of this lens. A bird like kestrel or a swift requires very quick focus for sharp picture, specially when they have just taken off from their pirch. I am reasonably confident many super telephotos can’t handle such speed, assuming the camera is capable. Do you think I make sense? I will be honoured to see your response.
Cheers, Imtiyaz
Virag
January 8, 2020 8:02 am
Planning to replace my 300F4 (non-VR) + 1.4 TC with 200-500. In rain-forest jungle birding with non VR lens is bad idea
Jigar
November 28, 2019 9:05 am
Nasim, did you ever write a post on D500 with 200-500 lens as you promised in this review. On my recent Alaska trip I struggled alot with one camera as changing lens became cumbersome and many times I lost the shot. So, I am in the market for 2nd camera and debating between D500, D750 and D810. Would love to get your take on D500 and 200-500 combo for wildlife photography. I have D750 for landscape and portrait.
Hi Jigar, If you have D750 already, you must try your hands on D500. I have realised that one who has handled Nikon FX cameras will sincerely appreciate D500 for its performance, build, frame rate etc. I have both these cameras. They compliment each other brilliantly well.
I have both, and totally agree with you. In fact, I have two D500 cameras since they are so good!
Vern Southard
January 15, 2019 8:43 am
Thanks for a very comprehensive review on the Nikon 200-400. It’s good that Sigma andand Tamron forced Nikon to put out an affordable professionally sharp telephoto lens, as not everyone can afford the big two’s mega expensive glass. I have the Sigma 150-600 Sport, which I use for birding in Florida. It is very heavy, very tough, and I get acceptably sharp images when pairing it with full frame Canon cameras. It is not as sharp at 600mm at long distances, as it is at 500mm. It is extremely sharp at 600mm at less than 100 feet. Looking at your sample shots with the Nikon 200-500 it seems very sharp on a crop sensor body, which could keep the overall cost of a birding setup down, now that megapixels have been boosted in lower cost cameras. Nice to finally have a choice and option to go with either Canon or Nikon and not have to pay the price of a car to get decent results when good bird photo opportunities happen.
Nikon 200-500mm
Re. Your comment “Why can’t Nikon make its tripod feet compatible with Arca-Swiss?”
Perhaps because not everyone uses Arca type mounts?
Nothing would persuade me to change from Manfrotto RC2.
Nikon gives us the choice, what’s wrong with that?
Thanks for this comparison, i’ll get the nikkor 🙂
This lens is almost perfect price/performance wise, if it weren’t for the sample variation, the lack of weather sealing and the lack of an arca-swiss compatible lens collar. The Tamron 150-600 G2 does have weather sealing and arca compatible lens collar, but the downside is that it is much softer near the edges and has significant vignetting on FF.
Just one comment. Combined with the Z50 the 500-200 works excellently with the TC1.4 and TC2.0 converters. I did notice some tendency for back focussing and AF-Fine Tuning might be important to get the best out of the system. Actually after the AF-Fine-Tuning I use my system mostly with the 1.4 times converter getting really pleasant results. I take of the converter only in difficult light conditions. With the 2.0 converter I have mixed feelings – cropping into the picture of the 1.4 converter gives often better results.
Hi Michael, I am really fascinated to hear that you can combine the 1.4 converter with Z50 and the 200 – 500mm. Sounds great!
This is absolutely no problem – I get very sharp images after doing the AF-Fine Tuning. I would call my 700 mm combination pixel sharp. The AF works reliably in all modes. VR of course as well. With the 2.0 times converter AF still works. However, the sensitivity towards light reflexes etc increases, the contrast decreases and the resolution as well. I also AF-Fine Tune at 500 mm only and I see clear improvement when stopping down the lens to F8, F11, and even F16 for the combinations with 500 mm, 700 mm, and 1000 mm, respectively. Nevertheless its possibly the fastest and most light weight solution to 1000 mm with AF and VR capabilities. With the crop factor of the APS-C sensor you get some amazing magnifications. Furthermore, as the sensor size is smaller the loss of resolution at the edges of the image is less. I do not know if I can upload images in the forum otherwise I would send you some test images.
Oops — newbie with discussions — re: Nikon 200-500. I have been using it for a couple of years now, on a Nikon D7200, for nature (birds, wildlife) as well as Air Shows, quite often handheld — and it has given me wonderful results. As a newbie here, I don’t know how to post some examples — Birds, Foxes, Blue Angels, the Moon etc.
Thank you.
Love the website, comments and excellent advice.
Hi Nasim, As always masterful analysis of the famed 200-500mm 5.6.
Among the sample images which are of course great, I dint see any picture of a bird in flight that can give a fair indication of speed of focus acquisition of this lens. A bird like kestrel or a swift requires very quick focus for sharp picture, specially when they have just taken off from their pirch.
I am reasonably confident many super telephotos can’t handle such speed, assuming the camera is capable.
Do you think I make sense?
I will be honoured to see your response.
Cheers,
Imtiyaz
Planning to replace my 300F4 (non-VR) + 1.4 TC with 200-500. In rain-forest jungle birding with non VR lens is bad idea
Nasim, did you ever write a post on D500 with 200-500 lens as you promised in this review. On my recent Alaska trip I struggled alot with one camera as changing lens became cumbersome and many times I lost the shot. So, I am in the market for 2nd camera and debating between D500, D750 and D810. Would love to get your take on D500 and 200-500 combo for wildlife photography. I have D750 for landscape and portrait.
Hi Jigar,
If you have D750 already, you must try your hands on D500. I have realised that one who has handled Nikon FX cameras will sincerely appreciate D500 for its performance, build, frame rate etc.
I have both these cameras. They compliment each other brilliantly well.
Cheers,
Imtiyaz
I have both, and totally agree with you. In fact, I have two D500 cameras since they are so good!
Thanks for a very comprehensive review on the Nikon 200-400. It’s good that Sigma andand Tamron forced Nikon to put out an affordable professionally sharp telephoto lens, as not everyone can afford the big two’s mega expensive glass. I have the Sigma 150-600 Sport, which I use for birding in Florida. It is very heavy, very tough, and I get acceptably sharp images when pairing it with full frame Canon cameras. It is not as sharp at 600mm at long distances, as it is at 500mm. It is extremely sharp at 600mm at less than 100 feet. Looking at your sample shots with the Nikon 200-500 it seems very sharp on a crop sensor body, which could keep the overall cost of a birding setup down, now that megapixels have been boosted in lower cost cameras. Nice to finally have a choice and option to go with either Canon or Nikon and not have to pay the price of a car to get decent results when good bird photo opportunities happen.