Question about the Nikon 200-500mm 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).

MikeJ

MikeJ

Well-known member
Member's gallery
Hello all -

I've been following this forum probably close to day 1, coming here after finding Steve's wonderful videos on YouTube. As RonG mentioned in another post and so many others commented, so great to have a forum of professional, like-minded people willing to share so much combined knowledge! I've learned a lot in the short time since the forum has started, and I thank you all!

Now on to my question. Over this past weekend I rented several lenses, one of them being the Nikon 200-500mm VR. I liked almost everything about the lens except...the tripod collar. It was not smooth at all. The knob needed to be loosened quite a few turns, and when rotating the orientation it was, for lack of a better term, ratchety. It was like it was catching on each of the little bosses on the lens that keep the collar in place. I even removed the collar to see if it was damaged or anything that would be causing this.

For those of you that own or have owned this lens, have you found the same thing? Or did I get an anomaly? Maybe because it was rented? Although other than that, it looked brand new. Of the three lenses I rented (Sigma 60-600, Nikon 500mm PF, and the 200-500) they all of course had strengths and weaknesses, but this would be a deal-breaker. It's a shame, the photo below was shot wide open at 480mm. I know it's less than perfect, there was a lot of brush between us, but I wasn't about to move since he had no idea I was there!

Thanks in advance!

D50_9915_01.JPG
You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.
 
Member's gallery
My copy of Nikon's 200-500mm lens was also a bit rough in terms of rotating the tripod collar. I mostly used the lens handheld so it wasn't a show stopper but FWIW, the rotating tripod collar in my lens wasn't the smoothest either.
 
Member's gallery
My copy had a different issue, the collar would not stay locked down. No matter how tight I tried to get the knob, it would still rotate slightly. I recall the rotation wasn't very smooth either until I lifted the body a little while rotating. Tells me it's a balance thing. I replaced the collar with one from RRS and things improved noticably.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for the reply, DR! I just wanted to try as much of the functionality of the lenses, looking for something a little longer than my 300mm AF-S D, but more portable for longer hikes than my 400mm. I had it on a monopod at the time with the Wimberley mono gimbal head.
 
Member's gallery
Thanks for the info, Warren, if I go with that lens maybe the RRS collar! With the sample I had, it was really rough even just holding the lens body with no pressure or weight on the lens or collar.
 
Member's gallery
I own and have utilized the Nikon 200-500 as my "walk-around" or everyday lens. While I have not used the 500 pf I understand it too be quite light and very easy to hand hold. For me personally I still like to have the ability to zoom in and pull back when I need to. Just yesterday I was shooting my 600mm f4 prime lens from a vehicle and came up on a Muskrat where I was only 10 -15 feet from it but I could not focus because I was too close, so I missed out on that shot. If I had been using the 200-500 I most likely would have maybe been able to get the shot. For the price on that lens I don't think anyone can go wrong. I have from time to time added silicone lube to my collars to help them spin but you have to use it sparingly because you don't want to make it too slick where it won't grip enough in full lock down mode.
 
Member's gallery
I have the 200-500 VR and the 500 PF. My 200-500 Tripod Collar is slightly rough when rotating which I don’t rotate very often if at all. The lock down has to be very tight or the collar will slip. In comparison to the 500PF at three times the price the 500PF rotates very smoothly and doesn’t require hand wrenching to stay tight. Personally, I wouldn’t let the collar concern on the 200-500 keep me from owning this Lense as I have been very pleased with image quality.
 
Member's gallery
Thank you everyone for your replies! I agree, the lens itself was pretty amazing. Snapshot - you're right about the 500 PF, very smooth rotation, very light, but at three times the price I don't know if it's worth it? And I did like the ability to zoom, as VStammer pointed out. And like Graham, with an aftermarket foot!

Thank you all for your comments!
 
Member's gallery
I have the 200-500 and the collar is fine, I always get a RRS foot plate and I did that for the lens. However, I also have an 80-400 and that collar did the same thing so I replaced the whole collar. Since I got the 500PF the 200-500 has been on the counter!
 
Member's gallery
I have the 200-500 as well. The collar wasn’t as smooth as I thought it should be, but tightening and loosening worked fine. I replaced it with the RRS collar and foot. I primarily handhold, but when I do use the gimbal it works great
 
Member's gallery
Yep, my collar grabs on the screws or something making it hard to rotate, it sucks but i handhold 100% of the time with the 200-500 so not a big issue in use for me.
 
Member's gallery
Not to steal the OPs question: However, I have the 200-500, which is amazing and stands up to many 3 times its price in IQ. My copy has a bit of catchyness as well. As another has mentioned, another issue can be the inability to lock the collar down. If any of you have found a simple fix for that (aside from a Kirk or RRS purchase, which are not cheap for sure) could you please help out? If MikeJ goes with the 200-500, this advice could help him out as well.
 
Member's gallery
KCPhoto said:
Not to steal the OPs question: However, I have the 200-500, which is amazing and stands up to many 3 times its price in IQ. My copy has a bit of catchyness as well. As another has mentioned, another issue can be the inability to lock the collar down. If any of you have found a simple fix for that (aside from a Kirk or RRS purchase, which are not cheap for sure) could you please help out? If MikeJ goes with the 200-500, this advice could help him out as well.
Click to expand...
I had thought of a shim between the collar and lens barrel. I also thought of grinding down some of the metal between the clamps where the threaded bolt goes thru. In the end, I decided it was better to get the RRS collar. While the idea of a shim seems easy, you have to be careful using any sort of adhesive, it will melt when hot and might end up causing more problems than it solves.
 
Member's gallery
Thank you all for your comments and help. It's interesting people have mentioned shims, and replacement feet. The collar/foot design is very similar to the one on my 300mm AF-S D, which I'm sure everyone knows that design was somewhat flawed and not very stable or secure. For that lens I got the Kirk replacement collar and couldn't be happier. I did enjoy the 200-500, was very impressed with the image quality and handling. Maybe now it'll come down to which comes into stock first, the 200-500 or the 500PF!
 
Member's gallery
I ordered a Kirk collar when I ordered the 200-500. It works great. After reading these comments,
I am glad that I didn’t try to use the stock collar.
 
Member's gallery
MikeJ said:
Hello all -

I've been following this forum probably close to day 1, coming here after finding Steve's wonderful videos on YouTube. As RonG mentioned in another post and so many others commented, so great to have a forum of professional, like-minded people willing to share so much combined knowledge! I've learned a lot in the short time since the forum has started, and I thank you all!

Now on to my question. Over this past weekend I rented several lenses, one of them being the Nikon 200-500mm VR. I liked almost everything about the lens except...the tripod collar. It was not smooth at all. The knob needed to be loosened quite a few turns, and when rotating the orientation it was, for lack of a better term, ratchety. It was like it was catching on each of the little bosses on the lens that keep the collar in place. I even removed the collar to see if it was damaged or anything that would be causing this.

For those of you that own or have owned this lens, have you found the same thing? Or did I get an anomaly? Maybe because it was rented? Although other than that, it looked brand new. Of the three lenses I rented (Sigma 60-600, Nikon 500mm PF, and the 200-500) they all of course had strengths and weaknesses, but this would be a deal-breaker. It's a shame, the photo below was shot wide open at 480mm. I know it's less than perfect, there was a lot of brush between us, but I wasn't about to move since he had no idea I was there!

Thanks in advance!

View attachment 9060
Click to expand...
I immediately replaced the tripod collar with one by Kirk Enterprises. I would recommend that you do this with Kirk or RRS>
 
Member's gallery
MikeJ said:
Thank you all for your comments and help. It's interesting people have mentioned shims, and replacement feet. The collar/foot design is very similar to the one on my 300mm AF-S D, which I'm sure everyone knows that design was somewhat flawed and not very stable or secure. For that lens I got the Kirk replacement collar and couldn't be happier. I did enjoy the 200-500, was very impressed with the image quality and handling. Maybe now it'll come down to which comes into stock first, the 200-500 or the 500PF!
Click to expand...
Mike, the 200-500 just became available at B&H yesterday; ordered my copy right away. Did not order a replacement foot. Will wait to see how the stock foot performs. Can't wait!
 
Member's gallery
The collar is a bit clunky but I don’t usually need to rotate it quickly, if at all. The one thing that was annoying was the single hole to attach a proper Arca-Swiss plate. Mine would rotate on my monopod with a Wimberley MH-100. I had a machine shop drill and tap another hole. Works fine now.
 
Member's gallery
I replaced Nikon lens collars with Kirk Enterprises compatibles including on the 80-400mm but excluding the 300 and 500 PF which I almost always hand-hold. Kirk machined to tight tolerances and work smoothly at a more reasonable $ than RRS. The foot is machined to be Acura-Swiss compatible so no need for a separate plate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top