Nikon 200-500 mm sharpness

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).

Member's gallery
The 200-500mm f/5.6 is my go to lens for birding and it has served me very well on both my D850 and D500 bodies. Maybe the 500pf is a better lens, but I like the ability to zoom out, especially for some BIF shots with bigger water birds. I am not sure what you mean by checking for accuracy, but the way I test is to set up a scene with a lot of texture and detail then shoot it at about 10 to 15 yds distance at 500mm in both Live View and with the OVF. I set the focus ring to infinity before every shot so the camera needs to refocus and I take about 5 shots in LV and with the OVF as AF is a random variable. If the average sharpness is the same in both sets of shots, be happy. If the LV shot is sharper than the OVF shot, then you can use AF fine tune to walk it in. If the OVF shot is sharper than the LV shot, you did something wrong. If nothing is in focus, maybe you have a lens problem.

Sharpness of glass is overrated. Sure you want good quality glass, but the lighting, subject, composition, exposure, and avoiding camera shake are much more important to a successful image. There are two parts to sharpness, lines / mm (lpm) of resolution and perceived sharpness. lpm is dependent on the number of pixels you have on the subject and the quality of your glass, but poor focus, camera shake or subject motion blur destroys lpm. Perceived sharpness can be changed in Post. We have all seen less than sharp images really cleaned up with PS or Topaz Sharpen AI. I tested a much less expensive Nikon 55-300mm lens against the 200-500mm @ 300mm. The 55-300mm was softer as expected, but by the time I got done in post, I got them to look pretty damned close to each other. The point is that a lot of amateur photographers "need" to buy the most expensive / sharpest lens they can afford when they would be much better served by improving their technique. Pros have already mastered technique, so the sharpest lens they can buy improves their results.
 
Member's gallery
As an amateur the 200-500 is sharp enough. At the end of the day I’m sharing on FB or such, where I’m posing jpegs anyway.
296E169F-C9F8-47FE-9CF6-D4F7E48ED703.jpeg
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Toppcats said:
Hello,

I looked at Steve's video on sharpness issues with the first two lenses he reviewed.
What is the best way to test this lens for accuracy?
Thanks
Click to expand...

An old but interesting article on lens testing in general.

www.lensrentals.com

How to Test a Lens

If you read my articles very often, you may have realized I’m not one to let a lack of knowledge prevent me from writing on a topic. First-hand knowledge I mean. I write a lot of articles that I may spend 6 weeks researching before I feel knowledgeable enough to start writing. But this is [...]
www.lensrentals.com
 
Member's gallery
@Toppcats - what is the problem you are trying to solve? I think there used to be a view that this lens would benefit from AF fine tuning but this has waned over the years. If you have this lens and your images are not sharp, it's more likely something else.

Can you elaborate?
 
Member's gallery
eft said:
@Toppcats - what is the problem you are trying to solve? I think there used to be a view that this lens would benefit from AF fine tuning but this has waned over the years. If you have this lens and your images are not sharp, it's more likely something else.

Can you elaborate?
Click to expand...
It may have waned because mirrorless AF systems have, for the most part, eliminated the need for AF Fine Tuning. It's still a good practice with DSLR's especially if you notice consistent focusing errors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hut
Member's gallery
aolander said:
It may have waned because mirrorless AF systems have, for the most part, eliminated the need for AF Fine Tuning. It's still a good practice with DSLR's especially if you notice consistent focusing errors.
Click to expand...
I went through the exercise with my D500 and found there was no significant adjustment required. Not trying to generalise, but that was my experience.
 
Member's gallery
eft said:
I went through the exercise with my D500 and found there was no significant adjustment required. Not trying to generalise, but that was my experience.
Click to expand...
I did the same and ended settling for a +5 average throughout the focal length range of my 200-500mm. Like you say, though, not sure it was worth it. To do all your lenses, especially zoom lenses, is very tedious. I haven't given a thought to fine tuning with my Z6.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
@Toppcats
I'm not able to say if you need to do it or not. There are a lot of ways to test lens focus (which is different than lens sharpness). How I did a couple of mine (and it is tedious at best) is as follows. I tried the ruler at 45 degree angle and all the other stuff. What worked was I sat a cereal box with quite a bit of contrast on my driveway which slopes gently downward. I set up my tripod and took photos wide open. I tried this at several distances between close focus and about 75 feet away. I did it at 200, 300, 400 and 500mm. I could tell by the concrete of the driveway how much in front and behind the cereal box was in focus. I tried for as close to equidistant as I could get and averaged it out across the distances and focal lengths.

At the end of the day I made a slight adjustment. I'd have to go back and look on the camera but I think it was something like plus or minus 2 or 3.

That minor of an adjustment is kind of like gilding the lily. I honestly cannot say if it made a difference or not. The lens has always focused sharply for me on both my D7200 and D500. At least my copy produces very crisp images.

Hope this helps.
Jeff
 
Member's gallery
Had problems with a Tamron 150-600mm G2 where I just couldn't get sharp picts in my D7500 at 500-600 mm. One option is the Focal software - need the pro version. You can hook your camera up to the computer and it takes it from there. Some cameras have to have you change the fine focus points, others the computer does it all. Whether using something like Focal or doing it manually, be sure to have lots of light that doesn't change and the target at the right distance.
One note, I still had some problems with getting a sharp image. Sent the camera in to Nikon for maintenance, and then, with the fine focus adjustment, the IQ went way up.
 
Member's gallery
Dude. Quit screwing around in your studio. Set the lens at f5.6, go out and shoot whatever you normally shoot from 200 to 500 in 50mm increments and see what the photos show you. Shooting these longer lenses is different than shooting 200mm or less. Takes some patience to get accustomed to them. The only two things I could possibly wish for in the 200 - 500 5.6 is lighter weight and quicker auto focus. I took a lot of pictures before I got consistent results with it. It is my favorite bif lens to date. You need hands
on experience at this point. One of those cheaper sleeper lenses. :)
 
Member's gallery
dwillar said:
Patric, what does that bird have in it's left foot that is weighing it down? Inquiring minds wish to know! ;)
Click to expand...

It doesn't look like there's anything in his foot. He's just paddling across the water to get up to speed for take off. I don't think gulls hold prey in their feet.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
aolander said:
It doesn't look like there's anything in his foot. He's just paddling across the water to get up to speed for take off. I don't think gulls hold prey in their feet.
Click to expand...
Thanks Allen. I couldn't see anything either but I have never seen any of our local ring billed seagulls exhibit that behavior. They carry stuff in their mouths when avoiding the crows. :)
 
Member's gallery
dwillar said:
Thanks Allen. I couldn't see anything either but I have never seen any of our local ring billed seagulls exhibit that behavior. They carry stuff in their mouths when avoiding the crows. :)
Click to expand...
Alan is correct. Albatross are big heavy birds and like windy days to help get up, otherwise a good run….which is partially what we see here….he’s just getting to flight speed
 
Member's gallery
Toppcats said:
Hello,

I looked at Steve's video on sharpness issues with the first two lenses he reviewed.
What is the best way to test this lens for accuracy?
Thanks
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish, but if you just want to see if your lens can get sharp images, I'd suggest mounting your camera on a sturdy tripod in good light, shooting at a printed label or sign at various distances, then checking the results. You should be able to tell pretty quickly whether or not you have issues. I tried calibrating my 200-500, but quite frankly, it wasn't worth the effort. Generally speaking, I get fairly sharp images with my lens.
 
Member's gallery
Member's gallery
@Toppcats as you can see there are plenty of folks here willing to help out. But, we need to know more about your motivation to improve sharpness of your images and where you are finding it an issue.
 
Member's gallery
Its strange , Ive spoke to a few people that claimed their lens was a bad copy but after I tried them all but one seemed fine to me , just one was a little off and required more AF fine tuning at 500mm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top