I rented the 200 to 500 a couple of times, carried it and shot with it on my Nikon D610 for a couple of hours, never got tired, never felt too heavy. My guns are more like derringers; I'm 70 years old. I love that lens and would buy it if I could afford it.

I feel like Jared made this review just to show off his guns 😂

I have had the 200-500 5.6 paired with the D500 for a year now, and I couldn't be any happier. If you turn the camera one way and the lense the other way you can zoom quickly. If anyone is considering what to buy for their first telephoto I would strongly suggest the 200-500. Its heavy yes but it makes you really focus on posture and how to adapt to take good photos. Sports, animals, people, nature, it can do it all.

Swamp Elephants also known as Locals in Florida 👀😭

Great video comparing the 2 lenses. I love nature shots so I bought the 200-500mm to capture birds in flight. The weight is a factor causing shaking in focusing but the lens focuses on the objects anyway. Love it!

surprisingly the 500mm pf is still out of stock..had one in hands, the weight and size are just amazing

The Nikon 200-500 f/5.6 is a beast of a lens, and for the price is a bargain.

The 200-500mm is just a crazy good gift to the masses from nikon for going nikon. I just wish it wasn't such a dust pump. They could have sold it for more. That pf lens is for retiree birders without house payments and the f4 is for pros (who produce the images that sell nikon to the masses and retiree birders).

I love that you really focused on information that's actually useful for making an informed decision, well done comparison.

Another fantastic and very informative video mate. Your knowledge and advice has helped me seriously improve both my skills and contents of my camera bag. Bravo Jared! 😁

Beauty shots. Thanks for the comparison review as I'm shopping for a 500 -- was all but decided on the prime, but you've changed my mind.

Great shots Jared and couldn’t agree more I’d have the versatility of the 200-500 and save a stack of money. Added bonus of a good workout each time you use it 🏋️‍♂️🏋️‍♀️

I bought the 200-500 shortly after it came out and loved it. I had an older 500 f4 (no vr) and thought maybe it would give me better pix so I sold the 200-500. Well after not too long I seriously regretted selling the 200-500 and found myself not shooting as many pix because the f4 was so heavy. Sooooo I bought another one (used) and loved it and then the 500 f5.6 was announced and I immediately ordered it (Aug 2018) and a few months later with impending delivery (assumed) so near I sold my 200-500 again. Well - the new 500 f5.6 didn't arrive and so in late Jan 2019 I bought another 200-500 (used). Turns out my new 500 f5.6 arrived on the same day as my 3rd 200-500 in Feb 2019. I now almost exclusively use the 500 f5.6. It's welded onto my d850 and I use other focal lengths on other boides. This time however, I've decided to hold onto the 200-500 as well. For users who have guns like yours, the 200-500 is the way to go - it's a great lens for little money (comparatively).

I use the 200-500 adapted on my z6 for sports and it's very good. I have the Sigma 70-200 2.8 Sports as well, and while sharper and generally producing more contrasty and pleasing photos, the 200-500 is still always in my bag for sports.

I’m really pleased with my 200-500 - the VR is so good (much superior to the Sigma 150-600 which I was also looking at). Great that you did hand-held shots Fro. Sharper than I get - maybe I need to go to the gym more!

Excellent video, once again. This is helping me make my decision to purchase the 200-500 much easier. Thanks FroKnows!

I have the 200-500, very happy with it, It’s the best I could afford and it’s so sharp. Alas, it hasn’t made me a better photographer.

I just bought the 200-500mm lens before watching your video. Can't wait to get out there and really test it. You got some great shots.

Interesting comparison. I love the 200-500mm that I have. I've been able to hand hold it down to 1/30th at 500mm which is pretty nuts. I haven't found the weight too much of an issue even though I'm a pretty skinny guy and I was able to handhold it for a day at the zoo.

I own the 200-500 f5.6 for all of the positive reasons you mentioned. Quite frankly, at the time of purchase, I didn't consider the 500 mm prime simply because of cost. While weight was a factor, the cost differential and zoom capability won the day. I used the lens for Men's Member Guest Golf tourney at my club in 2019 was quite pleased with the shots.

Your shots with fog are really great! I love them!.. Very good job :)

I got the 200-500mm for almost a year and I really like it. The bang for the buck is just great and it's sharp... The weight...well, saves you that gym membership

Great video as always Jared. Can I ask you what is the gizmo on the hotshoe?

So many people that do reviews on the Nikon 200-500mm lens and others like the Sigma 150-600"s talk about not being able to zoom in one turning motion, well that's not true. As long as it isn't on a tripod it can be done by turning the lens in one direction and the camera in the opposite direction. One twist is all it takes me to go from 200 to 500 when hand holding.

Went with the 200-500mm and it is AMAZING. On the D500 I'm shooting 10 fps sharp focus with 750mm reach. What's not to love.

Your information is spot on! Yes, the 200-500mm lens is a bit heavier but the upside is that it provides beautiful shots that include depth and color. I had the option between choosing the 200-500 or the 500mm and I went with the 200-500 because of its versatility. Well worth the expense, just keep those arms in shape!

I have to say I agree. I own the 200-500 lens and I have used it with a D300s and D700 SLRs. It is a super lens! Sharp as a tack. The zoom is very good as sometimes you want to zoom out if you are too close. I shot with the 500 prime and its a fine lens, but I will stick with the zoom. Everyone has different needs and feelings, so the choice is up to the shooter.

Great video Jared! You may have saved me a bit of $$$ at the moment. I was on the fence about the 500mm and may just keep my 150-600 Tamron g2 for now.

That last vertical shot...nailed it. well done.

The Nikon 200-500 with the Nikon d500 you will have a winner couple for wildlife and it cost less form the Nikon 500 f5.6 so you absolutely right

Amazing photos of birds in flight. Simply wow!

I have the 200-500 and agree that it is heavy. I am on in years and mostly retired so I have gone to a Nikkor 300mm f/4 VR with a 1.4 teleconverter on my Z7. That combo is quite light and gives you 420mm at f/5.6 and is inexpensive. It should work as well on a D850. Worth trying, Mr. Polin.

Hey Jared, how were you able to record the EVF while still being able to use the evf instead? With my Z6 and Ninja 2 I have to switch to live view so that the Ninja could get a feed. Or is this a feature exclusive to the Ninja star? If the star can allow me to record EVF of my Z6 and OVF of my d500 without live view, i'm getting one.

I am so glad you did this video as I have both and truthfully I use the 200-500 more I doubt I’ve used the 500 maybe once as I would rather be able to alter the focal length. By the way you did some incredible shots I really like the birds in the fog. That would make a great book cover.

I can't speak to the 500mm f5.6 but I've used the 200-500 since 2016 with the D 7200, D500 and D 850. Versatile, light, sharp, economical. I've probably shot 150k images with it and I'm very pleased with the results. It's hard to think of a better spend for a wildlife photographer. I sent it back to Nikon in 2018, it had a mechanical issue that prevented it from zooming back in once it was zoomed out. Nikon fixed it and got it back in my hands in very short order.

I watch your videos for the entertainment value.........the great info is just a bonus lol.Keep up the great work.

I cannot afford the lenses though I really enjoy watching these kind of reviews. Thanks Jared :).

Excellent video. Right now I am using a 300 mm f/2.8 with 1.4X TC. I intend to go for a 500 mm PF for bird photography despite Nikon is on a limited production as far as this lens is concerned. What do u suggest?

Easy choice, for wildlife you are usually at the long end of a 200-500 so I wouldn't miss the zoom especially as you need to turn the zoom ring forever to get from the short to the long end. Low weight and small size will make the prime more frequently used. The 500/5.6 makes an excellent complement to say a 600/4 when you need to move fast or when going through difficult terrain where a giant lens and tripod would get in the way. It could also sit on the passenger's seat beside you in your car where a 600 with mounted lens hood feels a bit long and also a bit unwieldy to easily stick out the car window

Another great video mr olympia.I just can't see why anybody would choose the prime over the zoom unless as you say it is a weight consideration.I've looked at many images taken with the prime and comparing them to images i have taken with the zoom,there is no way the prime is worth the extra outlay as far as sharpness is concerned. There may be a slight difference if you are shooting resolution charts but in the real world,if you can live with the extra weight,the zoom is far more useful.

I have used the 200-500mm lens shooting the Reno Air races. Was perfect for this setting, until the lens malfunctioned. I rented it to try it. So 1/2 way thru the event, I had to use my 200-400mm setup. A great lens while it worked.

Own the 200-500 and have a backordered 500pf coming (sometime). I like others will shoot at 500mm focal distance, the vast majority of the time with my 200-500, so I look forward to 2 lbs. less weight to deal with, especially on my D850 with the battery grip. That combo gets heavy in a hurry. Nice review.

I live in Florida and rented the 200-500 to shoot motor sports (the roar before the 24 aka the 24 hours of Daytona test session) and some wildlife in the Lake Apopka wild drive. The 200-500 is a great lens however the weight is truly unruly. A monopod is an absolute must. The images were great. The best way to use this lens is to rent it unless you do wildlife photography or you are one of those photographers that shoot motorsports trackside (the dangerous way to do it), then shelling out the money will be worth it to you.

Not discussed is the lack of weather sealing on the 200-500 lens and the impact of getting caught in a rain storm here in Florida.

I have the 500mm f/4, VR G and the 200-500mm. I use both with my D4, D800 and D850. Love both lenses.

I Love the video. Fixed primes are nice. Because of the versatility, I’d take the 200-500. Or 300-750 on a crop sensor. The versatility of this lens will help with wildlife and sports like soccer, football and baseball in a stadium. Usually when I look for a lens, I think of what I don’t have or what focal lengths I do have. I only have three now. An 18-55 kit, 50mm f:/1.8G and 70-300 DX AF-P f:/4.5-6.3 ED VR. So I’m covered 18-55 , 50mm. (75 with 1.5x) and 70-300. So I’d go low to a fisheye or extend my 300 focal length with the 200-500. I do find the 200-500 more affordable. With these videos we all get to see photographs from these lenses in the conditions you are working in. Having a video like this does help tremendously on what these lenses can do. If I went to full frame... the 200-500 is FX and so is my 50. And for new bodies in the Z series I’d take the Z6 over the Z7. The fog shots are very good. Lots of detail in the feathers and the foliage. Tamron has a 100-400mm how does that compare to the 200-500? How about the new Tamron 16-300?

Excellent video...500 prime wow! How about comparing the new Nikon & Sony zooms with the D850 and A9 in inclimate weather?

I first had the Tamron 150-600 and I now have the Nikon 200-500. The latter produces much sharper images. The quality is simply great. Compared to the fixed focus 500 mm the versatility of the zoom is simply a must if you go for nature shots. I do a lot of bird photography and a fixed focus would limit my choices too much. And the weight never bothered me.

Great video Jared. I’ve traveled to Africa multiple times with the 200-500. It’s a bit heavy but having the zoom range especially when you go off road and can get close is a necessity. I’m usually in a truck or on the ground outside the truck so the weight is not an issue and changing lenses in dusty environments is risky.

i watched your review ive gone and bought the 200 500 zoom as i like wild life shots hope it works well with the nikon 5300 would like your thoughts about that

If I would have to select then all the time the prime - usually my targets in Wildlife are not coming close, so I don't need the flexibility of a zoom. And the prime simply offers greater sharpness usually and faster Autofocus. In the case of the new 500mm 5.6, the weight is also an extremely important factor. After a day of walking around in an area for Wildlife, you know what you did. Every kg saving counts a lot.

Hi Jared, what a great video, I have a NIKON 5500. with two lenses: 18-55 55-300. I wanted to use a Nikon TC 20E III AF S Teleconverter ring, but when I bought it I realised that it was not compatible. do you have any idea other than buying another lens of more than a thousand dollars, in order to extend my shooting distance? thanks a lot!

I have the 200-500 on a D500. Very sharp lens with lots of contrast, reach and versatility on my DX camera. This combo rarely misses a shot. There are times that the 500 is too much reach and I use the zoom. Can’t go wrong with it. Outstanding VR on this lens. The Zoom’s versatility is a game changer. I haven’t tried the prime 500 but i will deal with the added weight in exchange for the versatility. Hoping for a new D500 with more megapixels so I can blow up the images to much larger sizes on metal. Jared, another great video. Keep them coming.

Hi Jared, I'm debating between the Nikon 200-500mm vs Sigma's 150-600mm Contemporary for Wildlife, currently own the Nikon D5600 with the 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED VR, suggestions and/or thoughts I may not have taken into consideration? Did a lot of research and I found a lot of people talking about having to calibrate the lens for both, is this really common, should I be concerned? Thanks a bunch and keep up the great work! :D

Tbh the pictures you took are absolutely amazing

Pre-Ordered my Nikkor 500 PF back in August 2018 still waiting! Rumor indicates late July that some will become available for shipping.

I have both lenses. While the 200-500mm is capable of fabulous shots, I do believe it to adversely induce dust on the sensor. I had it welded to my D500 for months - never took it off. The sensor spots became extreme. Not a deal breaker - just needed cleaning. I have now welded my 500mm PF to my D850. Just fabulous for walking around. I was almost always on the long end anyways. Another potential happy medium to consider is the 500mm prime with a full frame body such as the D850. I feel like most folks use the 200-500mm with a D500 or other crop sensor body, so we are really talking about 300mm vs 500mm with the PF on a FF body. The PF handles TCs, and the zoom lens just doesn’t that well. With the D850, if I can’t get close, I crop in post and the pixel count puts me at the D500 level or better. If I fill up more than 1/2 the frame with my subject I’m in the money with the D850. Traveling with the 500mm PF is a dream. Fits in the backpack attached to the body with the hood on effortlessly. Ready to shoot instantly. So much lighter while carried on a BR Sport sling while hiking too. Both are super, but the 200-500mm will definitely collect dust now.

Jared, I have a question for you. I have a Nikon D70 right now I been using the 128 MB that came with the camera, can you tell me what is the best size that will work for this camera the biggest is it a 4 gig or can I go bigger?

i own the 200-500 and use it on the D750 and it is perfect in quality also the price is a massive point against the 180-400mm or the other prime lenses (300mm 400mm 500mm 600mm) so the 200-500 is the best option for a super tele lens

Up north in Ohio where I live, a great blue heron will take off when you get about 250- 400 ft away if on land. If in a boat about 150 - 250ft. In Florida, it is like a being in a zoo, you can almost hand feed them. I have shot extensively, 1000's of photos, at 600mm and almost never needed to zoom in. So it depends where you live and what you are shooting.

Very cool! I've just managed to get my hands on a copy of the 500mm PF and wondering the same thing, whether I'll be able to replace my 200-500mm with it, or would I miss the zoom too much? Just posted a quick little video of my initial impressions over on my channel too... :D

I agree with most of what Jared says. I decided on the 500mm f5.6 pf because it is lighter and weather proof. I use my lens most in rain forests in Central America. The lighter weight is so much easier to shoot with when you stop hiking and go straight to shooting. About 85% of my shots I took before with my sigma sport were at 600mm anyways, so I'm always at the long end of my lens. I have a 28-300mm as my second lens if needed. I've never used a nikon 200-500 before, but my images are so much sharper with the 500mm f5.6 pf than my sigma 150-600mm,

Thanks for this comparison Jared! I recently purchased the 200-500mm (paired on d850), I was blown away by the quality of images it produces throughout the entire focal length. Having to twist the zoom ring 720 degrees is its weak(est) point...weight is also a factor, so I stabilize it when possible, but the VR helps a *ton* ;) Jared, 16-35 or 14-24, nature/landscape mainly.. Or should I go 24-70mm, already have a Nikon 35 f1.8 and a 20 f1.8, Much appreciated!! :)

what’s that piece which’s mounted on top of the camera body with a cable ?

WOW amazing shots! That Sharpness tho 😍

If the video wasn’t good enough already, 11:27 really iced the cake

what's the name of the device that allows you to capture what you're seeing in the viewfinder?

This is something I have been looking at for at least 2 or more years wanting to know weather to get a fixed 500mm Nikon lens or a 200-500mm lens. I have been thinking about it and was not sure where to spend my money. The other question was if I should get the Sigma lens that goes from 200-600mm because it is lighter than the Nikon lens and more affordable being $900.00

Jared, I really like your reviews. I am also very impressed by your ability to handle big glass with speed and precision. I am equally impressed by both your youth and your bulging biceps. Since one of your more important good qualities is to bluntly tell it like you see it, I will try to be equally open and blunt. For the kind of wildlife photography you do, you should absolutely use the zoom. In midday, "zoom" around in a mechanical contraption so loud you have to wear ear protection. Find some animals just trying to eat and raise some replacement animals and head straight for them. You will need to quickly zoom through the focal range as the victims first freeze, then panic and finally flee in terror. Humans +15, animals -2. Score!! Seriously, most wildlife photographers spend much more time getting close to their "prey" than actually photographing them. They virtually never find themselves in danger of overfilling a frame. They also know approximately how close they can get well in advance to whatever species and situation they have chosen to photograph. They are trying to show natural behavior, not fight-or-flight response. If they find themselves over-lensed, they will stay further back so as to disturb the animals even less. When trying to move quietly for long distances through natural terrain, weight and bulk are your enemies. Check out the videos of Morten Hilmer, a fellow KZfaqr and professional wildlife photographer. He has big biceps too. He was a member of the Danish Special Forces, Arctic Division. He hauls around big heavy primes when he has to, but he complains a lot about having to do it. Also, in our capitalist human world we tottering retired geezers carry weighty wallets. You buy your zooms and we'll buy lightweight primes. We went through the "zooms are just as good as primes" phase decades ago. Let the games begin!

Good info thank you

I have the 200-500. It's a beast but a sharp one:) Love it!

Been shooting 50-200 2.8 with 2 x teleconverter for years now, seem to give me the focal length I find myself zooming in and out and 140-400/5.6 for less than 1k € is damn great still today.

It took 8 months for us to get 2 500 mil PF lens, my wife had us on so many lists but we finally got them 4 days ago and they are so light and just awesome! Hey Jared, neither my hair or guns are as big as yours......

Good test, thanx. But may be can something tell me about 70-200 2.8e + TC2x vs 200-500 5.6e. What be better (contrast, sharp)?

The Black Rapid you use here, what typ is it? as it is red + I shoot Raw logo on it = costum design?. looking on buying a Black Rapid to save my neck from my new lens.

Will the 200-500 be a good lens for my Nikon d3400? I am not willing to change my camera body, and I am using the lens only for landescape far subjects. How will the autofocus work with this body? Thanks

One thing that hasn't been mentioned (which is a common complaint with 200-500 users) is focus acquisition and holding for birds-in-flight; it's never going to be as good as a prime. But the 200-500 is a great offering from Nikon, and now with the 500PF and the new 200-600 and 600 f/4 lenses from Sony, these are interesting times! I think if Nikon came out with a 600PF I would sell my 500 f/4E.

I love this dude's reviews!

If I were still using Nikon gear I would have sold my 300mm f4 PF ED VR and Nikkor 200 - 500mm f5.6 for the Nikkor 500mm f5.6 PF ED VR. I agree that the 200 - 500mm is a fantastic lens, but I am out walking for 7 hours a day, 5 days a week and it really is a heavy lens. I always carry two cameras and got to a stage where I had to move to lighter systems. Pity.

I own the 200-500mm and the weight is a consideration. I am traveling stateside later this year and my thoughts are do I carry the 2-5 or go with 24-70 and 70-200?

I don't know which lens to get as I'm upgrading, would you recommend the nikon 200-500mm lens or the sigma 600mm lens. Any feedback would be great.

Interesting comparison, though it would have been good to see a head-to-head in similar lighting. I've just moved from the 200-500mm to a 500mm PF and have to say I'm blown away by it. Could be that my 200-500mm is a little tired but to me the image quality of the 500PF is way better, the focus (adapted on a Z7) is noticably faster, and the VR is better allowing some ridiculously low shutter speeds handheld. Also, I tend to do photography hikes and the weight difference is very welcome - guess I just don't have the Fro-guns for the heavier lens ;)

That is a very good suggestion! I think I definitely will choose the zoom lens

I have the 200-500 and have come to love it. I was thinking about getting the 500 prime cause I thought it would be sharper and colors would be better not to mention the weight. I photograph wildlife manly birds in flight, so your vlog made up my mine and just save my money and wait for something else. Pair that lens with a D850 and you get crazy sharp images. Wish I would have known you were down her in my territory I could have taken you to a bunch of cool places. Oh well maybe next time. Peace

I have both. The 200-500 is an excellent lens, but since I bought the 500PF, it's been sitting on my shelf. Almost all my 200-500 shots were at 500mm anyway, so I don't miss the lack of zoom. The 500PF seems a bit sharper, AF is faster and it's much more comfortable to carry while hiking. The only thing I can really complain about is the VR. These PF lenses have VR issues (at least on DSLRs, not sure about the Z bodies). Other than that, it's an excellent lens. It's my go-to lens for wildlife with my D850. Also, another thing to consider is the 300PF with 1.4TC. Sharpness is still very good, and size/weight is amazing.

The 200-500 is an excellent lens if you need a zoom, but the 500PF is the better lens; sharper, much faster AF, and takes the TC14EIII better.

Like countless others, I would love to get my hands on the 500 PF. Alas, I think I will physically wear out my 200-500 before that happens.

GREAT PICS

now those are great shots

Does Nikon make an adapter from z to F? I wonder if it makes sense to adapt the newer glass to older bodies.

I hear ya at 9:02 I also like getting in that bush myself.

Just watched you , I have the Nikon d5600 and after this video I'm going to buy the 200 - 500 mm zoom !!!

Love my 200-500 , colours and sharpness are spot on

Cool vid... the 500 prime looks unreal

What do you do, in terms of : D-lighting ... mode used (sport or normal for birds ) Metering ... etc Because 1 out of 3 attempts it seems to miss its Focus (Continuous at 25 points / Grp) i Usually shoot at 1/1600 or 1/2000 F7.1 or 8 sometimes 6.3 with Automatic white balance and Auto ISO .. Thanks !

Terrific comparison. I would want to go with the 200-500mm for price and versatility. My problem is I don't have near the guns you have and have great consideration if I can lift this monstrosity without a tripod. I really prefer hand held. I main interest right now is birding and wildlife. Thanks Jared.

Great video 🤘

I've got both and while I agree, you can't go wrong with the 200-500, once you carry the 500pf on a trail you'll be hooked. Cost and availability are the only downsides to the 500pf but it's a great lens and I am extremely happy I was able to get one.

Pretty impressive that the AF Tracking was that good with the pre-production model. Jump to 7:05 in the video. 😊

Welcome to Florida.... need to visit the Gulf Coast ❤️