Nikkor 80-400 vs 200-500

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).

I've been reading this discussion, but I'm stuck.

I hear from my friends that the longer and heavier lens is awesome, but very heavy and difficult.
The 80-400 sounds perfect for me, but is it worth $ 1000 for me to extend my range from 300mm to 400mm ?

I think the best thing for me to do, is not do anything. Just continue with my 70-300 "P" lens for now.
Thank you all for the wonderful feedback - my head is spinning!!!!!
 
I have limited experience with these lenses other than th 500mm pf.

I know the 500 of is legendary for quality and you can find great prices on used copies. My photo buddy has that lens and I have seen what that lens can do even against the best new z mount lenses. World class IQ.
 
I am going to disagree with others. In my experience (and I did try both lenses), the 80-400 is much sharper than the 200-500. Even with 1.4x iii the 80-400 looked great. However, I have read online there seems to be a lot of copy variation with the 80-400, so maybe I got an unusually good one. Or maybe it just matched perfectly with my D850 whereas others might have slight misalignment. All I know is mine was great. Before I got it I bought a 200-500 and tested it (at high shutter speed on a tripod) for one weekend and returned it because it was not sharp enough.
 
Back
Top