# Nikon 200-500 real world test



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

Rented this lens to compare it with the Sigma 150-600 contemporary I recently tried.  I paired it with a nikon 1.4x teleconverter for an effective 700mm f/8 lens and I must say it was impressive. I like it much better than the Sigma, tho I enjoyed the Sigma quite well.

I went to the Kaw Lake Annual Eagle Watch yesterday, and I'll post a few shots here (tho I'll defer the actual eagle shot until my second post, as I could really get close enough to capture any shots I'd consider keepers- even with 700mm of nikon fury at my disposal).

Saw a lot of smaller birds before I caught a whiff of an eagle- are these gulls? If so, I didn't know they frequented inland lakes (yeah- I should pay more attention):
1.




2.




 Thought the lens did a pretty good job of catching BIF, especially considering the teleconverter.

3.  If it had wings, I shot, so here was another capture:





4. Skeptical hawk is skeptical...




5. OK- don't want to discriminate in favor of wings only, so a shot the buffalo on the way home from the lake...




All in all- I was quite pleased!  It's officially a wish list item.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

And the promised Eagles- not great quality as they were cagey and SO far away that they began to break down from over cropping, atmospheric distortion, etc...

1. Best 'still' I could get- from 3/4 of a mile....


 

2. Flying eagle


 

3.  Another eagle


 

3.  Trio


 

None of these are 'bucket list' keepers, but they are certainly more than I coulda gotten with my 70-300, so I was impressed.


----------



## ZombiesniperJr (Jan 22, 2017)

Nice set the first two are gulls the third is a northern mocking bird And the skeptical hawk is a juvenile red tailed hawk Dont worry about the eagles they can be a pain to get close to they like to fly away alot or perch in a farmers land


----------



## Derrel (Jan 22, 2017)

Lens looks good. Very good. Shot #3 of the small bird shows off the optics.


----------



## baturn (Jan 22, 2017)

Very nice! Especially 3 and 5.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

Full set is here, if you are interested.  All the shots were taken with the big glass except for the dam and the buffalo sunset panorama.
Eagle Watch 2017 by mjk41


----------



## tirediron (Jan 22, 2017)

Great set from a fun lens!


----------



## zombiesniper (Jan 22, 2017)

Great set.
Looks like a good lens.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

ZombiesniperJr said:


> Nice set the first two are gulls the third is a northern mocking bird And the skeptical hawk is a juvenile red tailed hawk Dont worry about the eagles they can be a pain to get close to they like to fly away alot or perch in a farmers land


Yeah, it was good to 'scout' the area which is only about 40 minutes from my front door.  In the words of the Terminator (model T-1000, if I recall):  I'll be back.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

Derrel said:


> Lens looks good. Very good. Shot #3 of the small bird shows off the optics.


Agreed!  Viewed in full size, the detail in the feathers was quite nice, especially considering it had the 1.4 in the optical loop.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

baturn said:


> Very nice! Especially 3 and 5.


Thanks!  I also loved 5- I thought the color rendition in that one was just delicious.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

tirediron said:


> Great set from a fun lens!


It's going to be a sad day when it packs up to return to the rental vendor!  Really enjoyed it.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 22, 2017)

zombiesniper said:


> Great set.
> Looks like a good lens.


It was surprisingly good, I thought!  Really was impressed.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 23, 2017)

Before:




After (no stick growing out of head and less 'blah' sky)  ...


----------



## zombiesniper (Jan 23, 2017)

Nicely done.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 23, 2017)

zombiesniper said:


> Nicely done.


Thanks!  The blue sky is probably overcooked, but that's my initial reaction to most edits is to go crazy!  I can pull it back if it wears on me after a couple of days.


----------



## bulldurham (Jan 24, 2017)

Almost everything I post on here is shot with the 200-500. Now, coupled to the D500, it's a real powerhouse with a crop factor of 750mm, and it's sharp as a tack at 750mm.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 24, 2017)

^Sharp!


----------



## tirediron (Jan 24, 2017)

I'm continually impressed with mine.  I was going to shell out for a new 300 2.8 when mine died last year, but when I looked at what I was doing at lengths longer than 200, I couldn't justify it.  Almost everything I shoot at those lengths is either out doors, or for fun, and rarely did my 300 go below f4, and a lot was at 5.6, so I figured for 1/3 of the price of a god used 300 2.8, I could get a LOT more fun.  Nikon really nailed it with this lens!


----------



## greybeard (Mar 9, 2017)

I've been thinking of a super tele zoom.  Right now I am using a 70-300 and cropping the heck out of everything.  You just made up my mind as to what my next lens will be.  Nikon 200-500 f/5.6


----------



## birdbonkers84 (Mar 10, 2017)

Peeb said:


> Before:
> View attachment 133776
> 
> After (no stick growing out of head and less 'blah' sky)  ...
> View attachment 133782



Great to see photos from other tele lens, I did look at the Nikon 200-500, but it was way out of my price ranged especially for a first tele lens.

The edit you've done on that Hawk shot is great and I personally don't think you've over cooked the blue.

The shot really makes you appreciate the sharpness of its beak and talons.


----------



## Timppa (Mar 10, 2017)

You say that you enjoy this lens more than the Sigma C you have (or had?).
Is it that much better? really noticeable ? does the price difference justify the difference in quality ?
And don't you miss the extra 100mm reach on on sigma?


----------



## Destin (Mar 10, 2017)

Timppa said:


> And don't you miss the extra 100mm reach on on sigma?



Not to hijack, but wanted to give you my feedback on this. As you know I have the Tamron 150-600 G2... I considered the 200-500, and in some ways wish I'd gone that way. I believe it's sharper at 500 than my lens is at 600, and the constant 5.6 is nice. 

That being said, the large majority of my shots have been at 600mm and I'm left wanting more reach in many cases, even on my crop sensor D500. I'm not sure I'd trade the extra 100mm for the other aspects. 

Also consider that the sigma and Tamron options offer far more fine tuning and customization options with their USB dock accessories.

OP: Nice shots, especially the edited version of the hawk! I don't think you over cooked the sky at all!


----------

