Questions for current and former owners of the Nikon AF-S 200-500mm zoom.

[eft]

Background
I bought a D500 and the 200-500mm zoom one year and ~70K actuations ago. As soon as I bought the lens, I felt that there was more movement at the mount that I expected. By comparison, the shorter and lighter Nikon 18-200mm and Tokina 11-16mm lenses that I bought subsequently have zero movement. I was reassured that the movement was normal but after about six months I started to experience Err and F0 messages. The lens would not focus or even respond to the shutter release unless I either turned off/on the camera and/or ever-so-slightly rotated the lens in the mount. Cleaning the contacts and updating the firmware didn't help either. The frequency of these glitches increased to the point where I took the lens in and had it sent to Nikon for assessment. The repair center told me I had damaged the lens contacts at the mount and I would have to pay for the repair.

In my defense, I have babied this lens. I carry it by the lens foot or across my body. I've never lifted it by the camera body, or carried it in the tripod. And, I have always been careful in how I mount the lens and store it. (It is rarely off the camera tbh.) However, I wasn't prepared to wait any longer for a working lens by contesting the charges so I approved the repair and got the lens back today. Unfortunately, the mount still feels less snug than I hoped and I am concerned I will end up in the same position a few months from now. I have seen people talk about good and bad copies of the lens although I have to hope that most copies are good. Lastly, I appreciate that the weather sealing and build quality of this lens is not the same as some of the more expensive lenses. Still, the camera and lens are my first DSLR purchase and I was really hoping that the technical limitations would be mine and not the gear.

Questions

1. If you are a current or former owner of the 200-500mm lens, have you experienced similar symptoms?
2. If so, did Nikon try and repair the lens, did they pinpoint the contacts as the root casue and were the repairs to your satisfaction?
3. Is it possible that, over time, the lens contacts could have been damaged with the movement at the mount or is it more likely a result of mounting the lens?
4. Should I expect more movement at the mount because it is a long heavy lens and this is normal or by design?

Thanks!

 

[Pistnbroke]

Should not have moved in the first place ..the error was in not taking it back initially.
More likely mounting and unmounting to damage pins unless the contacts in the camera are displaced.
Should have no movement and be no different to any other lens.
I had no problems with mine apart from it was too heavy.

 

[JP Onstwedder]

I’ve had my copy for years, have taken it on safari, in the Arctic, in the tropical heat and humidity and never had any problems. Solid connection on both my current bodies including a D500. The connection error can happen with dust, or anything that blocks the contacts, but in my experience it is rare.

 

[wild-pics]

I have used the 200-500 and D500 on safari several times but did not notice any any mount issues. The mount connection was firm and had no signs of any play. I use my gear very carefully and never change lenses while on safari to prevent any chance of dust getting in.

 

[Steve W]

I have experienced some slight radial movement with some lenses on some bodies ( serious issue with the first gen 80-400 on a D90). I have observed some very slight radial movement of the 200-500 on my D810 but really nothing to be concerned about.
Manufacturing tolerances and wear are all contributing factors.

 

[EricBowles]

Background
I bought a D500 and the 200-500mm zoom one year and ~70K actuations ago. As soon as I bought the lens, I felt that there was more movement at the mount that I expected. By comparison, the shorter and lighter Nikon 18-200mm and Tokina 11-16mm lenses that I bought subsequently have zero movement. I was reassured that the movement was normal but after about six months I started to experience Err and F0 messages. The lens would not focus or even respond to the shutter release unless I either turned off/on the camera and/or ever-so-slightly rotated the lens in the mount. Cleaning the contacts and updating the firmware didn't help either. The frequency of these glitches increased to the point where I took the lens in and had it sent to Nikon for assessment. The repair center told me I had damaged the lens contacts at the mount and I would have to pay for the repair.

In my defense, I have babied this lens. I carry it by the lens foot or across my body. I've never lifted it by the camera body, or carried it in the tripod. And, I have always been careful in how I mount the lens and store it. (It is rarely off the camera tbh.) However, I wasn't prepared to wait any longer for a working lens by contesting the charges so I approved the repair and got the lens back today. Unfortunately, the mount still feels less snug than I hoped and I am concerned I will end up in the same position a few months from now. I have seen people talk about good and bad copies of the lens although I have to hope that most copies are good. Lastly, I appreciate that the weather sealing and build quality of this lens is not the same as some of the more expensive lenses. Still, the camera and lens are my first DSLR purchase and I was really hoping that the technical limitations would be mine and not the gear.

Questions

1. If you are a current or former owner of the 200-500mm lens, have you experienced similar symptoms?
2. If so, did Nikon try and repair the lens, did they pinpoint the contacts as the root casue and were the repairs to your satisfaction?
3. Is it possible that, over time, the lens contacts could have been damaged with the movement at the mount or is it more likely a result of mounting the lens?
4. Should I expect more movement at the mount because it is a long heavy lens and this is normal or by design?

Thanks!

I have the 200-500 and have used it on several bodies. Mine has far fewer images than yours, but has not been babied at all. I'm careful, but it's a tool and meant to be used.

I have not experienced similar symptoms, but I have had different levels of tightness or play in the mount of other lenses. Usually mounts get a little looser over time.

I have seen documentation of extreme wear on lens contacts. With long lenses there is a lot more wear than you would expect. The material is soft so it conducts current well, and it does wear over time. The damage comes from mounting the lens, play in the mount, etc. With macro photos the wear can be quite obvious. It's not something we normally check under magnification, but if you look you may find extreme wear.

Both the mount and the contacts are designed so they can be easily replaced. I've had lens mounts replaced a couple of times, and the camera side of the mount replaced a couple of other times.

The 200-500 is a consumer tele-zoom. It lacks a lot of size and mass that big lenses have - and that mass provides some structure and protection. It's long, relatively light, and used often handheld. In the best of circumstances, it's going to get banged and bumped.

My take is a mount replacement and replacing contacts after 70,000 images is probably likely. It's maintenance on a consumable when you have high mileage.

 

[Strodav]

After reading your post, I mounted my 200-500mm f/5.6 on a D500 just to see if there was any play. Nope, very tight. I mounted up a couple of other long lenses and they are very tight as well.

 

[Charles Loy]

Mine has slight, noticeable movement, if on a straight line- less than 1/8th inch.
I have found that (if cooperative) sending a defective lens or body to the dealer where purchased and asking them to send to Nikon assures a free repair, while under warranty time frame. Nikon wont argue or easy out with their dealership.

 

[Ductape]

Mine has always had more movement than any other lens I have owned. A tad concerning, but I have never experienced an error code.

 

[jeffnles1]

I've had my 200-500 for about 18 months. Something over 50,000 images shot through it. I've not had the problem you mentioned. It does move slightly but the movement is less than I had on my Sigma 150-600C lens.

As for Nikon repairs, I did have to send the 200-500 in for repair but they did fix it under warranty. My issue was the zoom stopped working across the full range. It would not close back to 200mm and would stop somewhere between 200 and 500. Nikon repaired it under warranty. The weather has been gray, dark, gloomy and downright cold in the 5 weeks or so since it has been back from Nikon Service. I'm still trying to discern if the lens is as sharp as it was before repair but the light conditions right now are not what I would use to test any lens.

Hope this helps and I hope you get it straightened out.

Jeff

 

[Warren D]

Welcome to the wonderful world of Nikon Service. It sounds like you are in the USA as that would be one of two typical answers Nikon gives people to get out of warranty service, the other being "impact damage". Sorry to hear, but take some consolation in being in the right on this as it's about all you'll get. You could try to argue the point by asking to elevate the issue but you and I will never get high enough up the food chain to get anywhere. My 200-500 has a bit more rotational movement than other lenses but hasn't been a problem. There does need to be a little rotational movement to allow for thermal expansion/contraction so I worry more about a lens that seems too tight.
I'm not saying it's right, but they only go by what they see and have no idea what kind of life the gear has had before they see it or what condition it was in when new. I've always been honest with them when sending gear in, if I've banged it, I'll pay. They tried to use impact damage with me once to get out of a warranty repair. I argued that I had been honest with previous repairs and after looking up my repair history, they reversed their decision and honored the repair under warranty.

 

[eft]

I really appreciate all the responses so far. Clearly there is a range of experience and opinion but my situation doesn't seem unique by any means. One thing I noticed on the returned lens is that one of the screws that holds the bayonet ring to the contacts holder is missing (1) and one is quite proud (2). See attached image. Anyone else see this on their lens?


Click for larger size

 

[Charles Loy]

As for Nikon repairs, I did have to send the 200-500 in for repair but they did fix it under warranty. My issue was the zoom stopped working across the full range. It would not close back to 200mm and would stop somewhere between 200 and 500. Nikon repaired it under warranty. The weather has been gray, dark, gloomy and downright cold in the 5 weeks or so since it has been back from Nikon Service. I'm still trying to discern if the lens is as sharp as it was before repair but the light conditions right now are not what I would use to test any lens.

Hope this helps and I hope you get it straightened out.

Jeff

Mine locked up solid at 490mm area. Many have locked up. The inventories are depleted in many locations, suggesting Nikon is revamping this lens.
I took mine to an independent repair, the repairman said they will all fail as the long throw of the lens barrel is not supported as required.

You can only see EXIF info for this image if you are logged in.

 

[jeffnles1]

Mine locked up solid at 490mm area. Many have locked up. The inventories are depleted in many locations, suggesting Nikon is revamping this lens.
I took mine to an independent repair, the repairman said they will all fail as the long throw of the lens barrel is not supported as required.

View attachment 14490

That is one reason I never carry mine extended. I always zoom it back to 200 after shooting. I've heard the heavy front element can cause problems if carried about fully extended. Funny that the 150-600 Sigma Contemporary has the same size front element and even after a horrific fall (kitchen counter onto hard tile floor) the zoom worked perfectly. One of the internal lenses must have been knocked off center. I sent it to Sigma with a letter stating it had fallen and they fixed it under warranty at no charge to me. I was impressed. I bought the Nikon while the Sigma was in the shop about 18 months ago. The Sigma works perfectly now but I do use the Nikon glass more.

Interesting if they do make an update on this lens.

 

[Strodav]

I really appreciate all the responses so far. Clearly there is a range of experience and opinion but my situation doesn't seem unique by any means. One thing I noticed on the returned lens is that one of the screws that holds the bayonet ring to the contacts holder is missing (1) and one is quite proud (2). See attached image. Anyone else see this on their lens?

View attachment 14489
Click for larger size

I looked at my lens, purchased new from a camera shop here in Houston, never sent in for repair. It does not have a screw in the threaded hole you labeled 1 in your photo. Sometimes manufacturers will put additional holes in machined parts for mounting in assembly equipment, handling, or calibration.

 

[eft]

I looked at my lens, purchased new from a camera shop here in Houston, never sent in for repair. It does not have a screw in the threaded hole you labeled 1 in your photo. Sometimes manufacturers will put additional holes in machined parts for mounting in assembly equipment, handling, or calibration.

Appreciate the report, thanks!

 

[Woodyg3]

I have that lens on a D500 and have gotten err messages that clear when I turn off and back on. Sometimes it clears if I simply actuate the shutter once. It happens very rarely. There is a small amount of play at the mount. I have had the same thing happen, although very rarely, with a 100-400 Tamron that fits quite tightly.

 

[aolander]

The hole in your photo is not a screw hole. It is open on my lens, too. The proud screw head is proud on mine also.

 

[eft]

The hole in your photo is not a screw hole. It is open on my lens, too. The proud screw head is proud on mine also.

Thanks - have also had this verified by the retail store I purchased the lens from.

 

[eft]

After my experiences earlier in the year I decided to move both end of the camera strap to the lens foot. This made all the difference so I assume that having one end on the foot and one on the body put too much strain on the mount. Haven't had an issue since

 

[DRwyoming]

After my experiences earlier in the year I decided to move both end of the camera strap to the lens foot. This made all the difference so I assume that having one end on the foot and one on the body put too much strain on the mount. Haven't had an issue since

Yes, you do want to carry the weight entirely from the lens foot. Having one end of strap connected to the lens foot and the other end on the camera puts a lot of torque on the lens mounts.

 

[Mr. Goodkat]

Background
I bought a D500 and the 200-500mm zoom one year and ~70K actuations ago. As soon as I bought the lens, I felt that there was more movement at the mount that I expected. By comparison, the shorter and lighter Nikon 18-200mm and Tokina 11-16mm lenses that I bought subsequently have zero movement. I was reassured that the movement was normal but after about six months I started to experience Err and F0 messages. The lens would not focus or even respond to the shutter release unless I either turned off/on the camera and/or ever-so-slightly rotated the lens in the mount. Cleaning the contacts and updating the firmware didn't help either. The frequency of these glitches increased to the point where I took the lens in and had it sent to Nikon for assessment. The repair center told me I had damaged the lens contacts at the mount and I would have to pay for the repair.

In my defense, I have babied this lens. I carry it by the lens foot or across my body. I've never lifted it by the camera body, or carried it in the tripod. And, I have always been careful in how I mount the lens and store it. (It is rarely off the camera tbh.) However, I wasn't prepared to wait any longer for a working lens by contesting the charges so I approved the repair and got the lens back today. Unfortunately, the mount still feels less snug than I hoped and I am concerned I will end up in the same position a few months from now. I have seen people talk about good and bad copies of the lens although I have to hope that most copies are good. Lastly, I appreciate that the weather sealing and build quality of this lens is not the same as some of the more expensive lenses. Still, the camera and lens are my first DSLR purchase and I was really hoping that the technical limitations would be mine and not the gear.

Questions

1. If you are a current or former owner of the 200-500mm lens, have you experienced similar symptoms?
2. If so, did Nikon try and repair the lens, did they pinpoint the contacts as the root casue and were the repairs to your satisfaction?
3. Is it possible that, over time, the lens contacts could have been damaged with the movement at the mount or is it more likely a result of mounting the lens?
4. Should I expect more movement at the mount because it is a long heavy lens and this is normal or by design?

Thanks!

I just got a used 200-500 in excellent condition and mine also has a slight amount or rotational play but not much, maybe a 3/32"-1/8" at most. I haven't suffered any issues with operation. So far this is the only lens I've noticed has play with the coupling, all of my lenses are tight.

Yes, you do want to carry the weight entirely from the lens foot. Having one end of strap connected to the lens foot and the other end on the camera puts a lot of torque on the lens mounts.

This is good to know. I just attached my PD Slide strap with one end on the foot and one on the camera's arca swiss plate but I haven't walked around with it yet. I'll be changing the both attaching points to the lens foot.

 

[jeffnles1]

I just got a used 200-500 in excellent condition and mine also has a slight amount or rotational play but not much, maybe a 3/32"-1/8" at most. I haven't suffered any issues with operation. So far this is the only lens I've noticed has play with the coupling, all of my lenses are tight.



This is good to know. I just attached my PD Slide strap with one end on the foot and one on the camera's arca swiss plate but I haven't walked around with it yet. I'll be changing the both attaching points to the lens foot.

What I do is attach my strap to the lens foot. I'm currently using a Black Rapid but there are several of the same design (over the shoulder / cross body). I attach a safety tether to an ARCA plate attached to the camera body and the other end clipped to the main buckle (not the swivel part) on the strap. There is enough slack in the tether to allow free movement. I have many miles on this setup and so far have never needed the tether but it gives me a little peace of mind to have it. At least if the swivel part of the buckle breaks (and it looks like the weak link in the chain) the tether may keep my camera and lens from crashing to the ground.

 

[jeffnles1]

11 Month Followup to my above post regarding sending my 200-500 back for repair.
I've used the lens extensively for the past 11 months. I have shot a little over 20,000 images with the lens in the past 11 months since the repair. It has performed flawlessly. I had no loss of focus accuracy or sharpness. It seems whatever they did worked. The 200-500 paired with the D500 have been a real workhorse combo for me.

Glad @eft's problem got straightened out.

 

[Mr. Goodkat]

I was a little concerned buying a used 200-500 after reading about it being hit and miss. I think I got a good copy and as I said before mine has slight rotational play but it isn't a problem. I'm happy with the picture quality and it's not hard to get nice shots hand holding. A few days ago I experimented with using the leg from my MeFoto backpacker S tripod as a monopod and othough it's spindley at the bottom leg section, I was impressed with how it made the images that much sharper. It's a nice alternative to my Benro tripod while still having the freedom to move around quickly and easily.