Get 5% off Loupedeck CT with code: Ephotozine5

New 200-500


LenShepherd 12 4.2k United Kingdom
9 Aug 2015 9:49AM
This lens seems more than interesting with a launch price of 1,179, likely to fall to 1,000 in about 6 months when available discounted.
This is much more affordable than any other Canon or Nikon lens going to 500mm.
The Nikon MTF show it at f5.6 very close to the Nikon 200-400 at f4, possibly due to 3 ED elements. The VR seems Nikon's most advanced to date.
It is no lightweight, I guess because PF or fluorite elements are not possible at the price point.
With an appropriate 1.4 converter it does AF to Nikon's minimum standard with an f8 body at 700mm
Interestingly the 80-400 G reports an aperture of f5.3 at 200mm and 500 primes from Nikon and Canon are f4 so it does not loose out much IMO on maximum aperture.
It is on my "wish list" Smile
peterthowe 12 5 2 United Kingdom
9 Aug 2015 10:30AM
HI Len,
There is a big diffence from the F4 to 5.6 and is a very wide gap.

Cheers, Pete Howe
thewilliam 12 6.1k
9 Aug 2015 6:02PM
The new lens is also an awful lot lighter than the 500mm f4.

Good lenses aren't much use if they're so heavy that they get left at home. Many enthusiasts will be happy to carry the new lens and that will boost sales. With very high ISO and the latest version of VR, we can get away with a smaller wide-open aperture.
StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
9 Aug 2015 8:07PM
At half the price of the newer 80-400mm AFS it might be worth a look, if the optics are at least as good. I don't mean to put down the other brands, but if its IQ isn't any better than the half dozen or so third party lenses in that category, I'll pass.
User_Removed 15 4.3k 2 United Kingdom
9 Aug 2015 8:31PM

Quote:
With an appropriate 1.4 converter it does AF to Nikon's minimum standard with an f8 body at 700mm



I'm still waiting to hear if it will work with the Nikon 1.4tc at that price point it won't be classed as a pro lens.
Icee 12 11 United Kingdom
9 Aug 2015 9:45PM
I'm a Canon user but am watching this lens as it might be enough to swing me over to Nikon.
LenShepherd 12 4.2k United Kingdom
10 Aug 2015 11:20AM

Quote:
There is a big differnce from the F4 to 5.6
Cheers, Pete Howe


There is an even bigger difference between about 8,200 launch for the new f4 500 prime, and 1,179 launch for this lens Smile
Some who cannot afford an f4 500 prime even second hand could afford this.
To aftertherain the Nikon specification at www.imaging.nikon.com shows all "e" converters work, including AF on an f8 body with the 3 versions of the TC-14e.
As Nikon describes this new zoom as good for sports it seems reasonable to expect the AF to be on par with the 80-400 G.
mikehit 11 8.0k 13 United Kingdom
10 Aug 2015 12:53PM

Quote:I'm a Canon user but am watching this lens as it might be enough to swing me over to Nikon.


The new Canon 100-400 is an excellent piece of glass - the Nikon would have to go some to beat that! I guess it all depends on how much better it is than Canon at 400mm and how much quality drops off between 400 and 500mm. And then there is the AF speed/accuracy (another excellent part of the Canon model).
StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
10 Aug 2015 7:29PM
Also Mike, 200mm as the shortest focal length can really be a pain at those times when one gets close to their subjects.
keithh 16 25.7k 33 Wallis And Futuna
10 Aug 2015 9:31PM
That's when you change lenses. Wink
NeilSchofield Plus
13 1.6k 1 United Kingdom
11 Aug 2015 11:54AM
If it performs, particularly at 500mm then they just need to announce a D400 to complete the package
thewilliam 12 6.1k
11 Aug 2015 12:16PM
With a relatively modest zoom range of 2.5, I'd expect it to perform as well as any modern Nikon zoom.
StrayCat 16 19.1k 3 Canada
12 Aug 2015 1:50AM
Yes Keith, that's why, until the reports are in, I'm still saving for a longish prime, maybe a 300mm f4; it's small enough, and light enough, to use as a walk around lens, and should give great IQ. If I want shorter, I'll change lenses.Grin That new 200-500mm is still a huge chunk of glass to carry around for a few hours.
annettep38 9 219 42 Germany
12 Aug 2015 3:41AM
Yes, it IS tempting. Very tempting.

Got my doubts about the converters though, my 200-400 is pretty useless with Nikon converters, it was a total waste of money till I sold the converter.
The 200-400 could sometimes really do with a bit more range, I have been thinking of a Sigma for walks and such like. But then on the other hand me and my 200-400 know each other so well by now so I still use it with that little kenko 1.4 from time to time.

Or there is that old 600mm 5.6 which was 1000 from a fellow epz member Smile Now that one is very sharp with a 1.4 tc.
LenShepherd 12 4.2k United Kingdom
12 Aug 2015 7:42AM

Quote:Yes, it IS tempting. Very tempting.
Got my doubts about the converters though, my 200-400 is pretty useless with Nikon converters, it was a total waste of money till I sold the converter.


Interesting comment.
I get good results with the Nikon 1.4x and decent results with the 1.7x with my 200-400, though a good tripod definitely helps.
I find the Nikon 1.4x does performs slightly better on the 80-400G, possibly because the 80-400 G has much more advanced VR than my original version 200-400.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.