New Lense Purchase

[06Honda]

In southern Ontario this is prime Snowy Owl season for the next couple of months so with the lense on the blink I am thinking about picking up the Nikon AF-S 200-500MM F5.6E ED VR, looks to be a decent lense for my type of shooting from the reviews and looking at images on Flickr. Price is not that high compared to other comparable lenses, this way I won't have photography withdrawals during my vacation. Anyone shooting with this rig, my D7200 would be a good body I am thinking for this one. Then when my other lense comes back from repair I will have 2 good quaility lenses for different outings. Have thought about the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300MM FED IF-ED but a little short. Could get a teleconvertor but the cost would be up there to the point where a new 80-400 ED VR would even make sense. Though call, once I get in the store I will be able to hold them and make a decision.

* My current NIKON AF-S 80-400MM F/4.5-5.6G ED VR is heading in for service today so that could take 2 months with the Christmas period upon us. The older ver of this lense the Nikon 80-400 4.5-5.6 was my main lense for years before giving it to my brother. Can be purchased for about $900 bucks, not sure how it would preform on my D7200. I used to shoot with this older ver on a D50.

A good lesson to be learned by me as only having 1 lense for shooting may come back to bit you at some point. So having a 2nd one could be a decent investment long term.

 

[hark]

@Blacktop has the Nikon 200-500mm f/5.6 mounted on a D500. I love the images this lens produces. And @BackdoorHippie has the 300mm f/4 PF and uses it with a teleconverter although not sure which one--usually mounted on a D500. Jake also has the Sigma Sport telephoto zoom which is the more expensive Sigma zoom lens. I believe he's mentioned the Nikon 300mm f/4 PF with a teleconverter is a tad sharper than his Sigma Sport zoom although it lacks the length.

From the reviews I've read on here by members who own the Nikon 200-500mm, the Sigma Contemporary (which is the less expensive Sigma tele-zoom and is more popular due to price), and the the Tamron equivalent, I'd go with the Nikon 200-500mm if I were in the market. It seems like the best one of those three tele-zoom lenses. Good luck!

 

[cwgrizz]

I have the 200-500 Nikon and shoot it mostly on the D7100. Sometimes I add the TC 14E II. It all works well. I have been pleased with the results from the lens using it with or without the converter. The only thing that has ever bothered me about this set up is that sometimes it wants to hunt to focus at times.

 

[lokatz]

I own the 200-500 and the 300 PF, and compared those two with a number of similar lenses in my search for the best solution: Tamron 100-400 (the brand-new one) and 150-600 G2, as well as Sigma 100-400. (Sigma's 150-600 Sports version may be the most serious contender here, but at around six pounds, it is too heavy for me.) Tested all of them with the same setup and target to get repeatable results, each on my D500 and at the long end of the lens.

Based on my testing experience, which admittedly focused solely on wildlife shooting conditions (handheld & wide open), the 200-500 is head and shoulders above the rest. One of Nikon's best bargains ever. If it were a pound or two lighter, it would be perfect.

 

[06Honda]

Thanks all for the great feedback, will try out this lense in the next few days hopefully. May luck in a find a copy a Camera Kingston downtown where I live.

 

[Danno_RIP]

I use mine on my D7200. Love it.