You're welcome.

It's good to keep it on as you don't really want to hold the camera and leave this lens hanging off the f-mount. Whilst it's probably unlikely to damage it, it IS over 2kg.

And I'll be looking forward to your and other's reports. On paper, that looks like an awesome combo.

Thanks for sharing your comment and enjoy shooting with the lens.

+Shozo Kimura thank you for watching and for sharing your comments. Someday, I hope to travel to your beautiful country for a photo tour. Until then, I will have to be satisfied looking at the photographs you and others in Japan share.

+Aleem Ali thank you for watching and for sharing your comment. I'd welcome the opportunity to photograph humming birds. Currently, I'm in search of local sites to photograph eagles. There are supposed to be several mating pairs who winter in this area.

+umarph Yes, I had VR on for most of the sample shots in the video. The vibration reduction is simply amazing. It engages instantaneously and delivers rock solid images.

I liked the quality of the images I made with the 70-300. The experience that got me into wildlife photography happened during a trip to the North Rim of Grand Canyon. I had parked at a pullout to watch a herd of bison grazing in a meadow when two big bulls started brawling. The longest lens I had was a 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED and I made some fine shots with it. But the action was right in front of me. What I came to realize over the next few months was that, for the animals I was photographing and where near home I could go, I needed a longer lens to fill the frame. If your circumstances make having a compact, lightweight kit a priority, something like a 70-300mm, a 300mm f/4 (compatible with a 1.4x TC), or a 100-400mm may be the right lens for you. They don't offer the same reach as the 200-500 but they'd be easier to hike or walk around with on an all-day outing. Good luck.

Thank you for watching. I'm at a loss as to what the wobble you describe might be. A good condition, fully functional version of the lens should feel pretty solid along the length of the body and throughout the zoom range. There is a known issue in which a small number of copies have suffered a zoom mechanism failure in which an internal screw becomes loose and either blocks or freezes the zoom action. However, that seems a very different kind of feel from what you describe.

Bill Ferris Thanks for the fast response, There is very small move there when I move the lens up and down, I took it to the store but they said it’s because big and not Weather sealed but other then that everything is working good on it and I m happy as you said. Thank you 🙏🏻

Dr. Ebrahem Habibeh thank you for watching and for commenting. In my opinion, the lens is sharpest at about 400mm, f/5.6. It's very sharp at 500mm, f/5.6 but perhaps a bit sharper at 500mm, f/6.3 or f/7.1. When paired with the Nikon 1.4x TC-E III, I typically close the aperture to the f/9 to f/11 range.

+Kerry Kesner, you can figure out the effective focal length of a lens by applying the "crop factor" to the actual focal length. For instance, Nikon DX format camera bodies have a crop factor of 1.5 so, if you multiply the focal length of the lens by 1.5, you'll get the effective focal length on a DX body, such as the D7200. The 200-500mm f/5.6E performs as a 300-750mm on the D7200 and other DX format cameras. To delve a bit deeper into the weeds, what I mean by an "effective focal length" is the angle of view a lens will deliver to the sensor of a camera. So, imagine three photographers standing in the same location and framing the same subject with 200-500mm f/5.6E lenses mounted to different format cameras. One, is a full frame FX body. Another, is an APS-C DX camera. The third is a micro 4/3's camera body. Because of the different sized sensors used in those three cameras, the 200-500mm lenses will perform at different effective focal lengths. The angles of view delivered to the sensors of those cameras would match the angles of view delivered by a 200-500mm (full frame body), a 300-750mm (DX body) and a 400-1,000mm (micro 4/3's body). The depth of field recorded at the sensor is determined by the lens aperture and the distance to the subject. So, if all three of our hypothetical photographers stand at the same location and frame the subject, and if all three are using their lenses at 500mm f/5.6, all three cameras would have the same aperture, the same distance to the subject and the same depth of field. Their angles of view would be different but the respective depths of field would be the same. However, suppose the FX camera owner decided to move closer to get a tighter shot of the subject. Suppose the DX camera owner chose to do the same. If those photographers moved close enough to match the angle of view captured by the photographer using the micro 4/3's camera, the DX camera owner would by 2/3 the distance to the subject as the micro 4/3's shooter. As a result, the depth of field in his photographs would be a bit more shallow. The bokeh would be a tad softer. The FX owner, at a distance matching the angle of view enjoyed by the micro 4/3's shooter, would be half the distance to the subject. The depth of field in those images would be even more shallow, the bokeh even more buttery. So, while sensor size does not have a direct impact on depth of field, the fact that photographers often make adjustments to compensate for the effective focal length (angle of view) delivered by a lens mounted to a crop sensor camera does produce differences in depth of field. It is possible to compensate for these performance differences but that gets even deeper into the weeds and would probably be better addressed in a separate post.

+Bill Ferris Thanks for the great explanation and also the great review! Keep up the great work! I just subscribed. Thanks, Again!

+Wayne Benoit, the instructions that come with the 200-500mm f/5.6E state, "Do no turn the camera off or remove the lens while vibration reduction is active. If power to the lens is cut while vibration reduction is on, the lens may rattle when shaken. This is not a malfunction, and can be corrected by reattaching the lens and turning the camera on." My recollection is that Tamron also recommends turning VC off turning the camera off.

Thank you so much.

Flora Moraitini, hello. Thank you for watching and for sharing your comment. In addition to Steve Perry, the reviewers at Photography Life also received a first copy that wasn't sharp. My copy is optically very sharp. I did experience a problem with the electromagnetic aperture that required sending the lens to Nikon USA to be serviced. Since receiving the repaired lens back from Nikon USA in December 2015, it has performed quite well. I am very pleased. If you haven't already watched them, I have a video on my KZfaq channel in which I talk about the repair experience and also a long term review of the 200-500. You may find them informative. As an active member on DP Review, my observation is that a few copies of this lens as well as the consumer quality 150-600mm zooms by Tamron and Sigma will leave the factory with astigmatism or another optical problem. It's not a high percentage but it is an issue. If you order the 200-500 and the copy you receive is not impressively sharp, I would encourage you to return it to get a sharp copy. That said, the odds are you will get a sharp, perfectly working copy and will enjoy using this lens. Good luck.

Settings for Moon photography will vary based on the lunar phase, possible special events (e.g. an eclipse) and the gear being used. As a general rule, I pair the 200-500 with a 1.4x TC for a 700mm focal length and shoot wide open at f/8. I shoot with a D500 to take advantage of the crop factor (angle of view equivalent to a 1,050mm focal length on full frame) and fill more of the frame than my D610. I try to keep the ISO at 800 or less. When photographing a crescent Moon a few days after or before the New phase, I typically use a monopod and am at 700mm f/8, 1/250, ISO 400-500. I shoot with VR engaged but, with the slow shutter speed, I take a minimum of ten exposures to ensure I have several tack sharp options to work with. When photographing a 1st or 3rd Quarter Moon, there is enough light to work with that I'll increase the shutter speed and also the ISO. Settings of 700mm, f/8, 1/400, ISO 500-800 work, well. A gibbous Moon just a few days before or after, Full, is even brighter and allows for a faster shutter speed. There isn't anything to be gained by closing the f-stop. The lens & TC combo is plenty sharp at f/8 and depth of field isn't an issue. If you close from f/8 to f/11 to gain just a skosh more sharpness, there should still be enough light to use a reasonably fast shutter speed without elevating ISO too much. A lunar eclipse can be a fun event to observe and photograph. The challenge, is that during the deepest part of the eclipse when the Moon is in the darkest portion of Earth's shadow, if is so dark that a slow shutter speed is needed to capture enough light to make a decent image. At 1/2-second or slower, you'll get blur due to the Moon's movement, unless your camera is on a tracking mount. I don't have access to one so I set up on a fixed camera tripod. The last lunar eclipse I photographed, the settings I used were 500mm, f/5.6, 0.4-second and ISO 3200.

@@BillFerris Thanks, very complet answer ! I´m working with a D500 anda 70/200mm with 2x TC with tipod and shooter. The chalenger is not turn the moon on a spot light ! But isn't so easy game with speed, apperture and ISO ! I will make note of this and i wil trie. Thks again. Best regards.

+Studio Loft, thanks for sharing your comment. The rubber ring certainly adds an element of protection from bumps and scrapes to the front of the lens. It also appears to provide some degree of sealing for the front lens element. I've got a message in to Nikon asking for clarification on the matter.

The 70-300 had an effective maximum focal length of 450mm paired with the D7200. The 200-500 will give you an effective 750mm maximum focal length. That's fairly significant. The f/5.6 constant aperture of the 200-500 means you won't be giving up any image brightness at the long end. Optically, the 200-500 should be a bit sharper, too.

Bill Ferris Thanks Bill. That's good info. Now I'm learning of a new Tamron 150-600mm G2! So maybe you can do a review on that.

omar fikret here's a link to my "Long Term" review of the 200-500: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/sLN7q5d6tLqdqJs.html In a nutshell, I do recommend the lens as a very good quality consumer long telephoto zoom. You say you'd be using the lens with a Nikon D810. I shoot with the D610 and, while I've not used a D810, I suspect it would have at least two significant advantages over the D610. First, the D810 has a superior autofocus system. That feature, alone, should help you get more keepers. Second, the additional resolution of the D810 should allow you to crop exposures and still retain good detail. Finally, if you're still undecided about the 200-500, I might suggest you rent a copy for a weekend and give it a shot. If you love it, but your own. If your hate it, start shopping used 500mm f4 primes ;)

+Sumangala Rajapakse, thank you for watching and for sharing your comment. The Nikkor 200-500mm f/5.6E is compatible with the D7100 and can be used with a teleconverter on that camera body. Since the lens will perform as a 300-750mm f/5.6 on your DX format camera, I would suggest using the lens, first, without a teleconverter. You may find the 750mm effective focal length to be adequate for your work. If you do get a teleconverter, I would recommend the TC-14EIII. This 1.4x teleconverter will allow the lens to deliver and effective focal length range of 420-1050mm, f/8 on your D7100. Beyond f/8, your D7100 may have a difficult time autofocusing.

+Bill Ferris ...Dear Sir...Thank you very much for the very great feedback. Many Thanks. With All Good Wishes. Sincerely yours, Sumangala Rajapakse - Educationist and Wildlife Researcher from Sri Lanka.

+Sumangala Rajapakse thank you for watching my videos and for sharing your comments. I have not used a UV filter with this lens and do not see a need for one. The lens hood that ships with the 200-500 is very effective and shielding the lens from out-of-frame light sources which might introduce glare and also does a nice job of protecting the lens from dings, nicks and other possible damage.

Once Again...Thank you very much for all the great guidances to Me. With All Good Wishes. Sincerely yours, SUMANGALA RAJAPAKSE from Sri Lanka.

Vincent, I haven't shot with the 300, f/4 PF. On an APS-C body, the 300 will have an effective focal length of 450mm. It's also smaller, lighter and a stop faster than the 200-500. All that said, if you want the reach of the 200-500 plus the convenience of a zoom in a still very handholdable lens, the 200-500 is hard to beat.

I often use VR when on the monopod. I'm usually handled for birds in flight but for wildlife and wading birds, I'm often on the monopod and shooting at 1/500 or slower. I've gotten good results on the pod with VR active at 500mm, 1/30-second.

Thanks alot !

+Steinar Knai thank you for watching and also for sharing your comment. If you have not seen my long-term review for the lens, I recommend having a look. For birds in flight, I mostly shoot handheld and am getting very good results. While I use the monopod on occasion, it is the ability to comfortably shoot, handheld, with the lens that makes it so versatile.

I agree, for birds in flight you need to shoot handheld most of the he time. But weight is a problem for me. I'm debating whether the new 300 f4 would not be the better choice on a D500.

+Steinar Knai the effective 450mm focal length and f/4 aperture would get you near to 500mm in reach while allowing you to keep ISO managably low at high shutter speeds. If size and weight are important criteria, the 300mm, f/4 PF isa great option.

+Naveed Nomi, with Nikon's introduction of the D500 DX format camera delivering comparable performance as their new flagship full-frame D5, you might want to add the D500 to your contenders list.

+Naveed Nomi, mounted to a Nikon DX format body (1.5x crop factor), this lens will perform as a 300-750mm f/5.6, which would be good for birds and wildlife. I find the 500mm focal length to be very useful for those subjects, though I have been giving serious thought to acquiring a 1.4x teleconverter. The extra reach would be nice, but the f/8 minimum focal ratio and potential for image degradation are a concern. Yesterday, I spent some time with a photog who was shooting with a Canon 7DII and a Canon 600mm f/4. The lens delivered an effective focal length of 960mm (Canon's APS-C format has a 1.6x crop factor) and the focused image in the camera's viewfinder looked tack sharp. I was more than a bit envious.

Hello and thanks for watching. 200 yds is quite distant. The more your subject fills the frame, the better the quality of the final image will be. At 200 yds, very few birds are large enough to fill a significant portion of the frame. Another factor that comes into play, is unsteadiness of the air. This can really wreak havoc with image quality. I suggest waiting until the bird fills at least 1/3 to 1/2 the frame before pressing the shutter release.

@@BillFerris thanks will do

Look at this mark Smith video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ibRkatFznNqblWQ.html

+Naveed Nomi that sounds like an excellent combination for wildlife and bird photography.

+Vincent Erwin Photography, thank you for watching a commenting. I've not used the various versions of the Nikkor 300mm f/4 so, am not in a position to compare the optical quality of those lenses with the 200-500mm f/5.6E VR. My experience with the 200-500, is that the optical quality is quite good.

aaron D unfortunately, no Canon camera is compatible with Nikon F-mount lenses nor are Nikon cameras compatible with Canon lenses.

Hi, I've used the 200-500 with my D90 to do some Moon photography. The D90 is not compatible with this lens and, as a result, is not able to control the electromagnetic diaphragm. That said, the Moon photos I took with the lens wide open at f/5.6 look great. The D5300 is compatible, according to Nikon, and should be able to control the lens' diaphragm.

+Bill Ferris Thanks for quick reply. some online reviews on other lenses claim loss of edge sharpness on apsc sensors. Thus asking :)

+Bala Singh - I have the Nikon D5500 which is similar to yours and the autofocus works fine. I could go on for ages at how good this lens is, just buy it you won't be disappointed.

Thank you sir

+Bala Singh according to the Nikon USA site, the 5000-series (5000, 5100, 5200, 5300 and 5500) bodies are compatible with the AFS 200-500mm f/5.6E lens. In other words, these bodies can communicate with and control all the functions of the lens, including the electromagnetic diaphragm. To test for compatibility, I recommend setting up a simple target (toy or doll, etc.) outside in daylight, put your camera in aperture priority, select the base ISO and use matrix metering. At 200mm, make exposures at f/5.6, f/8, f/11 and f/16. Repeat this sequence at 300mm, 400mm and 500mm focal lengths. Each set of images at a given focal length should look essentially identical. While images made at different focal lengths will be framed differently, they should also look similarly exposed.

Thank you so much for your information bill

You may have a compromised copy of the 200-500. I've routinely worked at f/5.6 with both copies of the lens I've owned (I wore out the first copy) and both have been sharp at f/5.6. If you have a copy that isn't tack unless stopped down to f/7.1, there's something wrong with it.

@@BillFerris I did not say it was not sharp at f5.6, it is, but the lens really shines at f7.1 to f11, I mostly try to use it at f7.1 which is the sweet spot for this lens.

@@jfphotography69 that's unfortunate. One of the strengths of this lens, is its performance wide open at f/5.6. I'd never recommend a person get the 200-500 with the intention of closing it down 2/3-stop as a standard practice. Of course, if one needs the additional depth of field, close it. But as a standard practice, shooting wide open allows faster shutter speeds for BIF and delivers more pleasing backgrounds for wildlife.

@@BillFerris I did not say it wasn't sharp at f5.6, it is, just not as sharp when stopped down a bit. Nikon hit it out of the park with this lens, including the price. Nice review by the way. D500 at f5.6. photos.app.goo.gl/n8CiHsnXZn4FnuqCA photos.app.goo.gl/yLJzrHwXYZA5m1MJA photos.app.goo.gl/WBmbuRgsYR3AcCFB6 photos.app.goo.gl/SGH2TtWEKLjkifM57 photos.app.goo.gl/J1nWWKDcZuLykHGi7

+Todd Roy, you raise a very fair question. While I purchased the lens primarily for wildlife and bird photography, I do believe it will perform well for landscape work under the right conditions. I'm fortunate to live near Grand Canyon National Park and the 500mm focal length should do quite well at isolating the distant buttes and temples in the Canyon.

Clean your screen, lazynut