Focus Issue with 200-400 F4G ED VR

If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).

dutchbenke

dutchbenke

Member
Member's gallery
This has been one of thoes days! My Nikon 200-400 F4G ED VR again has a focus issue!!! It keeps jumping around when I attempt to focus. It can not stay focused. This comes at a time when I was putting together a plan to purchase a new D850 or D6 body to help me in my outdoor photograph. This is my only BIG lens. I purchased in 2017 on eBay. This makes the third time that it's been to the Nikon Doctor for the related issues!!!! I have boxed it and will send it out to Nikon on Monday. I am trying to come to terms with a possible lens that will NEVER get fixed. What do I do? I have made a huge commitment to wildlife photography with all of the RRS Gimble equip, monopod and tripod act. I have enjoyed the lens BUT I have been looking at upgrading (Focal Length) to a possible 600mm. I was hoping that at some point I would gain enough camera time to look at an addition Big Lens like a 600mm. I have a number of questions for the forum:

1. Does this Nikon 200-400 F4G ED VR lens have a history that I need to know about?
2. Do I sell the lens when I get it back from Nikon (Hopefully they can fix it), and purchase a VRII version or step up and get a 180-400 F4?
3. Is there an alternative that makes sense?
4. I really want to upgrade my body inventory and add an D850 or D6 to my stable of 810's.

Help me PLEASE!!!
 
Member's gallery
I don't think this is common. I've owned a 1st gen 200-400 F4G VR, that I purchased second hand from a local dealer, for 4 years and never had that problem other than the occasional focus motor squeak. What focus settings are you using, on the lens body? Do you have memory recall turned on and set? Are you using the buttons on the lens body to focus (having it set to AF-ON) or the camera? In camera settings? Seems very strange.

Yours kind of sounds like it could be lemon, but that's just a guess.

When you've sent the lens to Nikon what have they done? Did they replace the motor? Clean it?
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
JANuser said:
I don't think this is common. I've owned a 1st gen 200-400 F4G VR, that I purchased second hand from a local dealer, for 4 years and never had that problem other than the occasional focus motor squeak. What focus settings are you using, on the lens body? Do you have memory recall turned on and set? Are you using the buttons on the lens body to focus (having it set to AF-ON) or the camera? In camera settings? Seems very strange.

Yours kind of sounds like it could be lemon, but that's just a guess.

When you've sent the lens to Nikon what have they done? Did they replace the motor? Clean it?
Click to expand...
 
Member's gallery
dutchbenke said:
1. Does this Nikon 200-400 F4G ED VR lens have a history that I need to know about?
Click to expand...

This peculiar one maybe..
I had 3 copies of the 200-400 myself (1 VRI and 2 VRIIs due to an accident) and I happen to know several other photogs who used this lens.
Never heard anybody with this kind of problems.
To be sure.. I guess you cleaned the contacts (lens and cameramount) and the AF sensor array?

2. Do I sell the lens when I get it back from Nikon (Hopefully they can fix it), and purchase a VRII version or step up and get a 180-400 F4?
Click to expand...
The VRI and VRII are a little bit different ie better VR and the last iteration got NIC but irl there’s little to none difference.
The 180-400 is a completely different animal, it’s got all the good props of the 200-400 and every weakness was adressed plus you get the very usable tc. (But at a price)
Nonetheless if you need/want a zoom there’s nothing coming close at the 180-400

3. Is there an alternative that makes sense?
Click to expand...
If you can and want to afford it the 180-400 is the ultimate a 200-500 or 150-600 a lot more sensible regarding your financials LOL

4. I really want to upgrade my body inventory and add an D850 or D6 to my stable of 810's.
Click to expand...
Completely different beasts.
High rez faster_than_average camera or a ‘low’-rez action camera built for speed and to deliver in the most extreme conditions. (Again at a price..)
 
Member's gallery
I have been checking out the problem further this morning and I believe I have found the problem. It is NOT with the switches! I have duplicate the problem by starting the focusing process @ 400mm. It seems that when I start the to focus at somewhere near 400mm the AF will jump around unable to get a lock. If I start to focus approx 300 or less it works fine and it get a complete lock. I can then move up towards 400 and focus without a problem. I am sending it into Nikon to check out the issue. Hopefully they can resolve it with adjustments.
 
Member's gallery
What focus modes were you using? How large was the subject in the frame? If sounds like the camera is not able to focus - which suggests a subject with low contrast or not enough light. Does the lens hunt for focus (racking in and out)?

I have very good success with my 200-400 VR. It's even better with the Z cameras.
 
Member's gallery
dutchbenke said:
1. Does this Nikon 200-400 F4G ED VR lens have a history that I need to know about?
2. Do I sell the lens when I get it back from Nikon (Hopefully they can fix it), and purchase a VRII version or step up and get a 180-400 F4?
3. Is there an alternative that makes sense?
4. I really want to upgrade my body inventory and add an D850 or D6 to my stable of 810's.
Click to expand...

I used to have this lens some years ago, but I cannot confirm things like this happening.
If I had it today, had the money and needed the zoom function I would jump to the 180-400 straight away. Just look at @Steve 's review :love: .
If you need the zoom and money is an issue, I would consider the VRII version. I know somebody who had both and he was a lot happier after going for the II version and he was working with D810 / D4s at the time.

However, depending on what you do it might really be worth thinking about a tele prime instead of a zoom.
In my case I was doing most of the shots at the long end and still wishing to have more reach sometimes. After IMO the older 200-400 did not work particularly well with a TC14, I took the chance to take over the 500 f4G from a friend. I never regretted the step and I (almost ;)) never missed the zoom. If I am out with the 500 and think there might be situations where the target is getting to close or there might be other targets than the one I have put the 500 on the big tripod, I have a second body with the 300PF at hand ... and from reading your post you should have enough bodies anyway :).
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
What focus modes were you using? How large was the subject in the frame? If sounds like the camera is not able to focus - which suggests a subject with low contrast or not enough light. Does the lens hunt for focus (racking in and out)?

I have very good success with my 200-400 VR. It's even better with the Z cameras.
Click to expand...

Really interesting, to read about this combination !

In my first post I forgot to mention that there was a noticable difference in behaviour between having the 200-400 on my D610 at that time or on the D810 of my friend. Not that I could acquire focus in D9 or more with the D610, but from the feeling the D810 seemed to be better in sorting out which AF point has to take over, resulting in less jumping and thus a better keeper rate. But it was not obvious enough to call it a definite observation and - to be honest - I cannot be sure that I was doing everything the same way when swapping lenses and cameras...
 
Member's gallery
Woodpecker said:
I used to have this lens some years ago, but I cannot confirm things like this happening.
If I had it today, had the money and needed the zoom function I would jump to the 180-400 straight away. Just look at [
Click to expand...
I cannot speak for the OP, but most of us who got this lens second hand did so because it is an inexpensive way to cover that range at F4. The 200-400 goes for $2k these days, the 180-400 is over $10k, that’s a big leap. I am sure it’s great, but way too expensive.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
JANuser said:
I cannot speak for the OP, but most of us who got this lens second hand did so because it is an inexpensive way to cover that range at F4. The 200-400 goes for $2k these days, the 180-400 is over $10k, that’s a big leap. I am sure it’s great, but way too expensive.
Click to expand...

That was why I said "if I had the money" :). If I really needed the zoom function TODAY and needed to go f4 TODAY I would probabla go for the 200-400 as well.
That said, some time ago I had the 200-500 here and the reason for giving it back was mainly the fact that I needed the long end most of time, I didn't like the handling of it compared to the 500PF and the AF felt really slow after being used to things like a 500 f4. But if I think back to my 200-400 days and compare the handling and IQ of the 200-400 with what I was able to get from the 200-500 I probably would prefer the latter, especially considering the fact that at this time the 200-400 was my longest lens. I can't compare it directly because I don't have the lenses at hand anymore but frome what I remember, when comparing the 200-400 with TC14 to the 200-500, yes, you loose 60mm reach but on on the other hand I were better off with the 200-500 in terms of IQ as well as AF speed and accuracy while in both cases have physically a f5.6 lens. But as I said, it is not a scientifically validated statement, but a strong feeling based on single samples of the two lenses and the TC as well as my way of using the stuff ;).

There might be two apologies for my statement regarding the 180-400:
  1. If you read about the experiences of people like @Steve or Moose Peterson and you are not totally immune for this kind of information and totally rational regarding purchasing equipment for you hobby, you simply want to have one :D.
  2. I have come to an age, where you start to ask funny questions "Shall I sell my motorbike of shall I keep it, because it will be the last in your lifetime ?" or "Should I go the rational way or should I go all-in considering the this might be the last super tele zoom I will by in my life ?"
It is nothing I would do regardless of the consequences (like having to sleep under a bridge or having to eat yellow snow and dry leafs) but, heck, it would be a dream to have one - and to have the privilege of beind able to use it the way it should be.
 
Member's gallery
I tired the 200-500 5.6 along side 200-400 F4, there was no question in my mind which was better, and I purchased the F4. Focus speed and accuracy, build quality, and ergonomics was enough to make the choice. While not great with the 1.4TC, it’s usable. If all I shot was wildlife, I likely would have gone with the 200-500 though. I enjoy sports shooting, so the F4 makes way more sense.

The 500PF would be great, but cannot justify the price tag for a hobby item. I’m sure it’s great for seniors who held good jobs during their working years to buy expensive gear for such things, not so much for a young working person. I had a hard enough time justifying the 200-400, but I plan to keep it for a long time.
 
Member's gallery
I am hoping to get good news from Nikon concerning my 200-400!!! It’s my first & only supper tel and I love it! It’s been a great lens to begin my experimentation with wildlife photography & was very cost effective. If all is well with the lens, I have decided to purchase a D850 & play for a while.
 
Member's gallery
It’s a great lens on the D850. So much detail in the areas that the lens shines (closer subjects), plenty of great Heron and Crane feeding shots from the combo. With the D850 I find I don’t really need the TC that much anymore,
 
Member's gallery
Update: I just got my lens back from Nikon!
0C59F67D-EAAA-4A55-B30B-45A072D07F62.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top