Nikon AF-S FX NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED Vibration Reduction Zoom Lens with Auto Focus for Nikon DSLR Cameras

Comment

Just received today and gave it a quick test of a few hundred images using a D600. I cant find any faults. Based on my sample Im very happy with this lens which has several features and capabilities I wanted. It is a great balance in size and cost for its tele range and performance. After hauling around and shooting larger F2.8 pro tele lenses in this range, this smaller size will be a lot more practical. Im much more likely to have this lens with me when I need it. Observations on my sample: * No focusing issues: fast and sharp at all f-stops and lengths. I tracked a squirrel darting along a fence ridge and it stayed tack sharp. Panning race cars in Sport lens mode worked notably better (sharper and/or allowed lower shutter speeds) than panning without. Cars moving towards and away from camera stayed sharp with lens wide open (granted this is a function of both camera and lens.) * Minimal vignetting: some seen wide open above 400mm, adequately corrected at F8, completely gone beyond F8 * Good sharpness: seems equally sharp across the field at all apertures and lengths; diffraction softness visible at f16 and above (no surprise). NOTE: Its been observed that some of Nikons long teles go soft at infinite focus and seem optimized for closer in. My testing was all within 100 yards, so I cant comment on far-focus sharpness... Ill be curious what others find. * Low distortion: nothing I could see, but I didnt find a great target for this * Low chromatic aberration: When viewing images at >2x full size in Lightroom I could find discolored edges a few pixels wide at high-contrast edges at all apertures and lengths. In all cases checking the "Remove Chromatic Aberration" box fixed the problem. * Very low flare: Very bright automobile chrome hotspots caused *zero* flare; direct sun filtered thru tree branches/leaves caused minor flare * Stabilization: the VR worked as expected; Sport mode worked great for panning. Doesnt have a tripod mode * Size and weight: I dont find the weight to be an issue when shooting handheld, but the larger diameter makes it a challenge to fit in my photo backpack since the barrel size is much larger than "normal" 77mm Nikon lenses. Its only an inch longer than the 300mm F4 I had in the pack, so the length isnt really the issue. Its a little less than twice the weight of that 300mm with a 1.4TC, a combo I consider fairly light. Upodate 9/4/16: After shooting several hours at the race track I didnt have any fatigue problem hand-holding the lens. * Tripod bracket: well located balance point with camera mounted; makes a handy handle for this large diameter lens esp with camera body attached; can be removed * Bokeh: out-of-focus circles are soft, but Im no expert on how to assess this * Good build quality: this isnt a cheap plastic lens, appears to be mostly metal; feels solid * Accessories: came with hood ( 4 in long) and soft fabric storage bag. I havent had a problem with hood coming off as some have reported, it seems tight. * Tele-converters and focus (update 9/4/16): Finally took several hundred pictures at a vintage auto racing event under sun and clouds and found the Continuous auto-focus to be fast and accurate for all directions of motion. No fuzzy shots, all very sharp. I noticed several focus squares would lite up. However when adding a Nikon TC-14E-II 1.4 Teleconverter (taking the lens to F8, maximum for camera for autofocus) to get more reach, the number of focus squares would drop to one and I would often get hunting (lens focus running in and out) and/or an out-of-focus image. This was true for cloudy and full sun. Didnt happen all the time, but I did lose shots due to focus failure and waiting for the lens to stop hunting... a definite risk. Photo metadata indicate pictures shot at between 280-700mm. Im sure there is some image softening and loss of contrast from this TC but it is slight. Lens works with all the Nikon TCs but anything longer than the 1.4 (i.e., 1.7, 2.0) must be manually focused and sharpness/contrast go down. With some lenses I found the loss of sharpness when using the 2.0 teleconverter was worse than just enlarging the raw lens image (dont have one anymore to do this test here) so would urge testing before committing to that TC with this lens. * Tele-converters & birds (update 4/22/17): Spent five days at Malheur Wildlife Refuge primarily photographing birds. Handheld the camera the whole time, possible because of the stabilizer and high camera ISO. When birds were on the ground I needed to reduce focus to a small circle to ensure critical focus on the head/eyes. When in the air I needed to enlarge the circle to make sure I was getting focus on the moving bird. After shooting at 500mm and wanting a little more reach I finally put the 1.4 TC on and was pleasantly surprised how well the focus worked for this. Ive attached a 700mm shot of a Marsh Wren (small bird 10-15ft out) at 1/2000s, 1400 ISO, f8, and a Harrier hawk (large bird hundreds of feet out) at 1/1600s, 1250 ISO, f8 (1:1 image). It seemed I often got sharper images on closer birds than farther but I suspect I was suffering from heat shimmer on the far shots vs. lens itself. I will say there were a lot of "almost-sharp" shots at all ranges and Im not sure the cause. Nikon reports my lens S/N as not needing the focus firmware update so I cant blame that issue. I dont have experience with other lenses this long to compare results with. I didnt get the high yield of dead-sharp images I do with the 70-200mm VR. * Solar Eclipse (update 8/22/17): How better to test infinite focus or extreme contrast than shooting the moon or sun? Typical advice is that its hard to get sharp images of the sun due to several factors, but Ill post these anyway. Sharpest focus was with notch mark right at center of the infinity symbol, using sun spots as a focus target. Both images needed chromatic aberration removed, which Lightroom had no issues fixing. Partial eclipse (moving towards 2nd Contact) was shot with solar filter (95mm Firecrest Neutral Density 5.4 Solar Eclipse Filter), and Diamond-Ring was shot without a filter. Both shot with Nikon 1.7 TC at 850mm, and everything manual, on a tripod with VR turned ON. Note: High-end 95mm filters are stupid-expensive, even compared to 77mm which I consider high. Nikons lens cap is also way up there. Bottom line, if you want a reasonably priced good performing long tele I think purchase of this lens is low risk. If you dont like it you wont have a problem reselling it. For image quality and speed it certainly beats stacking TCs on the shorter teles. The relatively light weight and VR make hand-holding very practical. But the large diameter makes it a bit of a challenge to put in your bag. Image post-processing should probably always include removing chromatic aberration.

Show more

Comment

As a professional photographer for 40+ years just retired, and an avid sports fan, this is a fabulous lens. I was a racing photographer before I opened two studios. I have assortment of telephotos but none this large. I shoot with a D7100 for action. I also love nature and tested this lens at Bolsa Chica wetlands. VERY impressive.Quality excellent. Both of lens and results. Hand held amazing.

Show more

Comment

I have used this lens for over two weeks now. Bought it the moment stock was in. I am comparing it with the Nikon 70-200 VR2 and 80-400GVRED (latest). I am also posting some photos directly here. It has one of the best returns on investment in quality, built and ergonomics. Better in my opinion than 80-400mm G and cheaper by 100%. Not as solidly build as 70200 but in terms of IQ, almost there. Summary: You can judge the image quality by the pictures you see. Focussing is fast, accurate and zooming is firm. All else 5 stars. Conclusion: Highly Recommended. Buy Now.

Show more

Comment

I bought this 200-500mm lens to replace my Nikon 80-400mm (old model). Compared to the 80-400, the glass is noticeably sharper and the VR works much better. In reality, the lens sharpness has far surpassed what I expected to get. This lens makes justification for mega expensive ultra-tele primes difficult. Comparatively, for $8,000 Nikons f/4 500mm prime only gives you 1 more stop. Theoretically along with that you should also get better bokeh and resolution. However, the resolution of this lens exceeds all of my other Nikon zooms, and begins to match the resolution of Nikon prime lenses. Bokeh also rivals what Id expect out of a prime. The 200-500mms aperture is fixed at f/5.6, not variable, which is better than the "off" brand ultra zooms. In overcast light, the VR is effective enough to get consistent sharp images hand-held at low ISOs. Ive even gotten sharp images in shade at 1/60th hand held. Compared to other ultra zooms, this lens is a BEAST and gets fatiguing after a morning of birding, but still much easier that a 500mm prime. The free B+W filter (at the time of writing) made this the deal of the century.

Show more

Comment

I never thought Id say this about a $1,400.00 super-zoom telephoto lens, but,.. it is phenomenal. This lens is sharp! The VR is very effective as well. It allows me to hand-hold the lens to below 1/100s at any focal length and get sharp results, provided the subject isnt moving much. Being able to focus on subjects close or far away and being able to zoom in or out is also a bonus. I shoot a lot of wildlife, birds in flight, surfing and so on, and needed a longer lens. I was using my 300mm f/4D AF-S plus Nikon 1.4TCII, which got me to 420mm at f/5.6. This combo works really well due to sharpness, light weight, smaller size and good reach. That being said, Im shooting with the D750 which is full frame, so Ive always wanted just a little more reach than that and something I didnt need a TC for. I was looking at the new Tamron 150-600mm G2 and this Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6VR. I decided to go down to Sammys Camera to give them both a try to see which one Id like better. Though Im sure the Tamron is great, I ended up really liking the Nikon. It just seemed to work better with my D750 as far as low light focus and VR were concerned. I liked it so much, that although I planned on buying it online, I couldnt help myself and handed over the cash so I could take it home that minute. I have read that there could be some copy variation and that some of these perform better than others. The one I picked up is flawless. It is pin-sharp wide open at every focal length with no AF fine tune necessary. Though it is a bit slow to focus on a subject initially, once it locks on, it tracks that subject very well. I havent missed any shots so far, so long as I was able to keep the lens on the subject. Its larger and heavier than my 300mm f/4D and TC combo, so it did take some getting used to. I would highly recommend this lens to any Nikon shooter needing more reach. This lens delivers even with a 1.4TC attached! Ive only tried it with my 1.4TC II (which holds up really well though it was first announced in 2001!), but plan on buying the 1.4TC III for improved focus, optics and VR with this lens. The TC brings you to 700mm at f/8. I was getting sharp results on subjects that were moving slower, but for flying birds it didnt quite work out. Im confident that the 1.4TC III will improve that quite a bit, since its meant to work better with these new "E" lenses.

Show more

Comment

With a Nikon D7100, this lens produces beautiful results at f/5.6 and f/8 and 500mm, the only parameter values at which I have checked it. Color rendition is attractive as is contrast. This lens-camera combination is acceptably quick to reach focus when initially fully defocused but no speed races will be won with it. When the lens begins close to exact focus, focusing is very snappy with the D7100 set as indicated. When using a 500mm or other long telephoto lens, the photographer often wants to crop the photo to bring out a target of interest that does not fill the frame, a bird for example. A reasonable amount of cropping, say 50% produces attractive results, but as the cropping becomes more extreme, the results become less attractive. This is no surprise. One apparent way around this is to increase the focal length with a Nikon teleconverter such as the TC-14E III. Attached to this lens and mounted on the D7100 the TC-14E III produces an f/8 lens-teleconverter combination which will autofocus with speeds quite like the speeds achieved in the absence of the teleconverter. The addition of the teleconverter produces some image degradation, which becomes more and more apparent as the crop percentage increases. Again, this is no surprise, but those photographers who wish to crop photos thus produced should keep in mind that the sharpness reduction caused by the teleconverter becomes more and more apparent as the crop percentage increases. Based on photos I have taken of outdoors scenes with and without this teleconverter, I suggest that those who wish to use a high crop percentage, forget the teleconverter and crop images taken with the lens alone rather than cropping images taken with the lens-teleconverter combination. This seems a bit counterintuitive because the crop percentage needed with the teleconverter in place is significantly less than the crop percentage without it when the target of interest is the same size in both cropped photos. With this lens at 500mm on a D7100 use of a teleconverter degrades photos made from highly cropped images noticeably more than does the more severe cropping used with images made without the teleconverter. When photographing shy birds in the wild, it is often necessary to shoot from long distances, sometimes hundreds of yards. My own tests were at 400 yards and I conclude that the sharpness of the final photo made from a cropped image will be better without the teleconverter than with it. The majority of wildlife photographers want the greatest possible sharpness in their final cropped images and the way to get it with this lens on a D7100 is to leave the TC-14E III in your camera bag. Inasmuch as the image degradation has nothing to do with the camera, I suspect that similar results would be obtained regardless of the Nikon camera body used with this lens. Not having tested a full frame body I will not speculate unduly on what the degradation would be like with a FX sensor. But I will go so far as to say that the sharpness difference between the lens-teleconverter combination compared with the lens without teleconverter on an FX camera would be less noticeable simply because the DX sensor subtends less of the circle of illumination that the FX sensor does.

Show more

Comment

Ive had the opportunity to use this lens for what it was intended, and Im even happier than I was before. Ive used the Sigma 150-500 and the Nikon 80-400 before and I think this is the lens Ill be using from now on. While it doesnt have the wider range of my 80-400 it is definitely going to be my choice for birding. I love that this lens is 5.6 through all its zoom range and the focus is extremely sharp and quick for my needs. I rated this lens 5 starts when I first used it and I only wish I could give it more after spending a full day shooting with it. Its amazing to be able to get an excellent quality Nikon super tele for my Nikon camera. This lens is well built and I definitely recommend it over the Sigma as the quality seems much better. Get one while you can and before Nikon decides its too good to offer at this price...lol

Show more

Comment

Without a doubt, the best consumer super-zoom on the market. Ive used the G1 & G2 Tamron 150-600 and Sigma Sports 150-600, and the Nikon image quality is noticeably better throughout the entire zoom range. Sure, it doesnt reach 600mm, but why would you want it if the image quality is poor? Id rather have tack-sharp 500mm than mushy 600mm. There are only two drawbacks Ive found: the lens hood is junk and the lens takes noticeably longer to lock focus than the Tamron or Sigma. Once the lens finds focus, though, it stays locked and tracks the subject very well. Im not a Nikon fanboy by any means, but this lens is clearly better than the alternatives, in my experience.

Show more

Comment

This lens is spectacular! I bought it in anticipation of the D500 I ordered. I tried it on my D90 which it is not supposed to be compatible with and to my surprise it did work, but you could not adjust the aperture so it ran wide open at 5.6. I finally got the D500 ( man what a beast of a camera and a step up from the D90, love it!) I dont think a day has not passed where I have had this lens on my camera, the 4 1/2 stops of the VR is nothing short of a magic trick, the shots that you can handhold is not to be believed. Attached two pics, the moon is hand held on my D90 (1/800, 5.6, ISO 320, 500mm), the chipmunk is handheld on the D500 (1/80, 5.6, ISO 125, 500mm). Both pics are straight out of cameras, re-sized in Photoshop, no adjustments. For the life of me I cant figure out why Nikon cannot produce more lenss like this at these price points. While I have never shot the 500 fixed, and am sure its sharper and focus much faster, I got to wonder is it around $9000 better? With the D500 and its awesome high ISO and this lens and its VR, I can shoot this thing indoors, just amazing. Running it wide open at 5.6 is where I use it the most, not sure if I even stopped it down yet :)

Show more

Comment

Ill start with the pros first: 1.) sharpness: Sharp wide open at every focal length. The 200-500 is sharper at 5.6 (at every focal length) than the Sigma C & the Tamron 150-600 is at f8 and beyond. On an FX body there is noticeable corner and edge softness (at least on my copy) of the 200-500. DX shooters wont be affected by this due to the crop factor. 2.) Build Quality: The build quality is good. What I really like is the fact that the lens has a stationary rear element, (something that the Sigma C & the Tamron does not have), so you dont have to worry about pumping dust inside of your camera as you zoom in and out. 3.) Weight: Even though its slightly heavier/bigger than the Sigma C, and the Tamron 150-600mm, I find the weight to be more evenly distributed and better balanced for hand held shooting. 4.) Contrast & Saturation: Excellent! Far superior than the Sigma C and much better than the Tamron 150-600mm. Cons: My only con is the auto focus performance. Its slow (70-300 VR G ED slow), some what sluggish, often hunts and Im shooting on a current high end FX body. I would rate the auto focus performance as a solid C+. Im waiting on my D500 from Adorama to be delivered and will update auto focus performance (depending on a significant improvement) at a later date. Overall Im happy with the lens. Good image quality, good build quality and excellent VR.

Show more