Nikon 200-500 vs. Nikon 300 +1.4x

Nikon 200-500 vs. Nikon 300 +1.4x for BIF shooting.
I sold my 1DM4, selling my 7D II and are planning to buy something for BIF.
I keep the 5DM4 and 500 f 4.0 II for static shooting and the 100-400 Mark II for wildlife.
Which lens would be better for BIF 300 f 4.0 the newest one or the 200-500 f 5.6
I heard that the 200-500 has some Quality control issue and some of them are soft.

Thanks,
Karl.

Almost forgot. The camera would be D500.

The 300 PF on the D500 has an angle of view about the same the 5D on the 500mm as they are only 50mm different once the D500 is converted to 35mm equivalence. (450mm vs 500mm) If that's the right Focal Length for you (or 630mm with the 1.4x) then you can't beat the 300 PF/D500 combo for size, speed and weight.

My opinions on the 200-500 is that it is plenty sharp. However, the focusing speed is not nearly as quick as the 300 PF with or without the converter. And I always recommend the 300 PF over the 200-500 if you're shooting faster moving subjects.

Thanks, Tony. Weight and focusing speed are good points.

Totally agree with everything Tony said. I have seen six copies of the 200-500 f5.6 and every one is VERY sharp. However, the AF speed is not great for BIF shooting. Some people have had good success using that lens for BIF, but it did not work well for me, as it was way too slow.

Karl Egressy wrote:... I keep the 5DM4 and 500 f 4.0 II for static shooting and the 100-400 Mark II for wildlife ...

Karl,
Wonder why for static only? I'd have thought 5D4 is plenty good for BIF as well?!

KK Hui wrote:

Karl Egressy wrote:... I keep the 5DM4 and 500 f 4.0 II for static shooting and the 100-400 Mark II for wildlife ...

Karl,
Wonder why for static only? I'd have thought 5D4 is plenty good for BIF as well?!

That is true, KK.
Most of the time I pair it up with 500 Mark II and a 1.4 III and altogether they weigh 10 lbs.
The weight is the problem as I age and I'm looking for lighter alternatives for had holding.
I never learned how to shoot BIF from tripod.

Karl,
If you're thinking of dual systems like adding Nikon to your existing EOS I'd consider a FF body such as the D850 instead.
Image quality of D850 is ahead of D500 I'd have imagined.

Anthony Medici wrote:The 300 PF on the D500 has an angle of view about the same the 5D on the 500mm as they are only 50mm different once the D500 is converted to 35mm equivalence. (450mm vs 500mm) If that's the right Focal Length for you (or 630mm with the 1.4x) then you can't beat the 300 PF/D500 combo for size, speed and weight.

My opinions on the 200-500 is that it is plenty sharp. However, the focusing speed is not nearly as quick as the 300 PF with or without the converter. And I always recommend the 300 PF over the 200-500 if you're shooting faster moving subjects.

One more vote for the 300mmPF - light, fast and super sharp.

KK Hui wrote:Karl,
If you're thinking of dual systems like adding Nikon to your existing EOS I'd consider a FF body such as the D850 instead.
Image quality of D850 is ahead of D500 I'd have imagined.

Thanks KK.
I fully agree with you but my budget won't.
I can barely afford the D500 and one of the lenses most likely the 300 plus 1.4x extender.
I still will have to sell my second camera, the 7D Mark II before I got the money together.
I no longer sell pictures so there is not money flowing in and I don't touch the family budget
for my hobby.

Karl, while I own the D500 and the 300 f4 PF + 1.4x III, and I think it is a fantastic very light combo, I am not convinced that it will be that great (snappy) for BIF. If there is any way for you to test the combo first, I would do that.

Karl Egressy wrote:Nikon 200-500 vs. Nikon 300 +1.4x for BIF shooting.
I sold my 1DM4, selling my 7D II and are planning to buy something for BIF.
I keep the 5DM4 and 500 f 4.0 II for static shooting and the 100-400 Mark II for wildlife.
Which lens would be better for BIF 300 f 4.0 the newest one or the 200-500 f 5.6
I heard that the 200-500 has some Quality control issue and some of them are soft.

Thanks,
Karl.

Almost forgot. The camera would be D500.

Hi Karl

I just bought the Nikon 300 f/4E, PF lens and have had a few outings to try it out on my mostly D500.  Here are a few examples.  I have no experience with the Nikon 200-500.  Both taken with the Nikon 1.4E III TC at iso 800.

Thank you all.
I made my decision based on your comments, thanks.
I bought the Nikon D500 and the 300 f 4.0E PF lens as well as the 1.4 Mark III extender.
Now it would be nice to know what the best setting for BIF, birds like Terns, occasional raptors and Osprey, the fishing guy.
So far I set it to continuous shooting, single focus point.
Some say 25 focus points, 3D tracking and so on.
Thanks.

Karl Egressy wrote:Thank you all.
I made my decision based on your comments, thanks.
I bought the Nikon D500 and the 300 f 4.0E PF lens as well as the 1.4 Mark III extender.
Now it would be nice to know what the best setting for BIF, birds like Terns, occasional raptors and Osprey, the fishing guy.
So far I set it to continuous shooting, single focus point.
Some say 25 focus points, 3D tracking and so on.
Thanks.

You are going to get a lot of answers on this but I did quite a bit of testing.  3D will tend to grab the near wing-tip a bit too often.  The same thing happens with Group.  For me in a ton of testing D25 or D72 had the highest success rate.  My testing was done with a Nikon 70-200E, 80-400G, a Sigma 150-600S and a Sigma 500S.  This is over several thousand shots in all different light and everything from hummingbirds at close range to Storks at long range.

Thanks E.J. I'll try it on Monday. I'll try D25.
It will be a pleasure to hold up a rig weighing 4 lbs instead of 10 lbs.

Karl Egressy wrote:Thanks E.J. I'll try it on Monday. I'll try D25.
It will be a pleasure to hold up a rig weighing 4 lbs instead of 10 lbs.

Good choice. Its a great butterfly combination as well.

MND wrote:

Karl Egressy wrote:Thanks E.J. I'll try it on Monday. I'll try D25.
It will be a pleasure to hold up a rig weighing 4 lbs instead of 10 lbs.

Good choice. Its a great butterfly combination as well.

And dragonflies, flowers, mushrooms, etc.

I generally use Group AF. If that's not working properly, I'll use Single before I'll use D25. I would try each because I think it depends on how well you track and how big the bird is in the frame.

The only body I tend to use 3D on is the D5. And I'll only use that for people pictures.

Congrats Karl! I'll be interested to see how you like the D500. One thing I found with the D500+300PF combo is that, being used to heavy lenses, the D500+300PF is *so* light that I actually have to concentrate harder on holding it steady, and it doesn't help that the VR isn't very effective on the 300PF (IMO). Hey, maybe we'll get you all the way over to the Nikon camp yet!

Gary Irwin wrote:Congrats Karl! I'll be interested to see how you like the D500. One thing I found with the D500+300PF combo is that, being used to heavy lenses, the D500+300PF is *so* light that I actually have to concentrate harder on holding it steady, and it doesn't help that the VR isn't very effective on the 300PF (IMO). Hey, maybe we'll get you all the way over to the Nikon camp yet!

Thanks, Gary.
It is a chance as I'm disappointed with some of the engineering and marketing decisions Canon makes.
What holds me back is that the 5DM4 paired with the 500 Mark II is sooooooo good. (except the weight of course.)
Long time no see. I hope you still are having lot of fun by capturing the beauty of Nature.

Thanks Karl, yes I get out when I can.

BTW, on the subject of Nikon’s VR, one quirk is that when shooting at high shutter speeds like you’d use for BIF, it’s best to either turn VR off, or select ‘sport’ mode. Leaving it in ‘normal’ mode can result in soft images from time to time. Personally I leave VR on ‘sport’ all the time ... that seems to work for me.

Gary