Both Nikon's 80-400mm's focus speed compared to 70-300mm ?? 2-500?

Lynn876 · Aug 16, 2017

Has anyone used the 70-300mm ED glass and compared it to either version of the 80-400mm? I'm noticing the prices on the 1st 80-400mm are so much less now. I'm wondering if they are worth it as the first generation ones have a reputation as being slow to focus.

I have the 70-300mm ED lens and love it. It is a little slow in low light, but it's fine. It's actually my favorite lens.

EDIT; Oooh! Just saw that the 200-500mm is actually cheaper than the new 80-400mm. I had no idea. Any feedback on those? I usually shoot in "S" or speed mode- not aperture mode.

PHXAZCRAIG · Aug 17, 2017

I don't have any experience with the 70-300 model you mention, so I don't know if it is slow, fast or average AF speed.

I do have the other lenses you mention though, so can comment on them compared to each other.

The 80-400 AF-D (original 80-400 version) - pretty slow AF speed. Slowest of the bunch.

70-200 f2.8 VR II (I think that is one you were asking about). Fastest AF speed of the bunch, as would be expected from an expensive pro lens designed with fast AF in mind.

80-400g - quite fast. Not quite as fast as the 70-200, but much closer than the other lenses.

200-500 - average to slowish. Closer to the 80-400AF-d speed than the other two.

You want reach, sharpness and excellent VR? 200-500. You want fast zoom rate and AF speed? 80-400g or 70-200F2.8.

I have some test shots from some of the lenses mentioned above here:

http://www.cjcphoto.net/lenstests/index.html

Myself, I use the 80-400g a lot, because a) it is about the same size as the 70-200 and not much worse, and b) it fits in my (large) waist bag. I basically use it as a substitute for the 70-200 to get more range, unless I'm shooting indoors or in low light.

dwa1 · Aug 17, 2017

Lynn876 said:
Has anyone used the 70-300mm ED glass and compared it to either version of the 80-400mm? I'm noticing the prices on the 1st 80-400mm are so much less now. I'm wondering if they are worth it as the first generation ones have a reputation as being slow to focus.

I have the 70-300mm ED lens and love it. It is a little slow in low light, but it's fine. It's actually my favorite lens.

EDIT; Oooh! Just saw that the 200-500mm is actually cheaper than the new 80-400mm. I had no idea. Any feedback on those? I usually shoot in "S" or speed mode- not aperture mode.

Whenever asking for lens advice, it would be very helpful (for you and others) to indicate your intended subjects and their lighting conditions. It would also help to indicate which Nikon bodies you would be using. This way people can give you more "targeted-to-your-needs" info.

With that said, based on your info here and your subsequent "edit", I would suggest that you take a look at 2 of Nikon's recent AF-P 70-300 lenses. Most copies of the AF-S 70-300 VR lens are soft over 220mm. So, it is really like having a decent "70-220 VR" lens.

I have a great copy of the AF-P DX 70-300 VR lens. It is sharp at 300mm wide open (f6.3), it has very fast AF, very nice bokeh, a short MFD, it is very light and (imho) it is way under-priced.

Nikon just released an AF-P FX version of the 70-300 VR which should also have good IQ at 300mm. Sample images are just starting to come in here on these DPR forums.

The AF-S 80-400g VR looks to be a great lens - but, as you noticed, it is way over-priced compared to Nikon's recent offerings. With the cropping reach of today's very high resolution sensors, the difference between 300 and 400 is not that great any more.

Hope this helps in some way.

Wayne

Vince P · Aug 17, 2017

Lynn876 said:
Has anyone used the 70-300mm ED glass and compared it to either version of the 80-400mm? I'm noticing the prices on the 1st 80-400mm are so much less now. I'm wondering if they are worth it as the first generation ones have a reputation as being slow to focus.

I have the 70-300mm ED lens and love it. It is a little slow in low light, but it's fine. It's actually my favorite lens.

EDIT; Oooh! Just saw that the 200-500mm is actually cheaper than the new 80-400mm. I had no idea. Any feedback on those? I usually shoot in "S" or speed mode- not aperture mode.

The ED was not usually thought to be one of Nikon's best and nor was the original 80-400. The latest 80-400 is well thought of. The 200-500 also well thought of but may have an Achilles heel in terms of speed to focus. The 70-300 AF-P as has been said is pretty good and focuses well. There is test on Cameralabs where they compare it to the 80-400 which might be useful.

calson · Aug 17, 2017

Autofocus with the 80-400mm is noticeably better than the 200-500mm on my D500 camera. Both are f/5.6 in terms of specifications but the 80-400mm with the 1.4x teleconverter will still autofocus on my D500 but not the 200-500mm.

I took the 200-500mm along with the 500mm f/4 on a trip to Alaska last year and it proved to be a mistake. I missed a lot of BIF shots with the 200-500mm lens that I would have gotten with the 80-400mm zoom. My experience is specific to the D500 camera.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

PHXAZCRAIG said:
I don't have any experience with the 70-300 model you mention, so I don't know if it is slow, fast or average AF speed.

I do have the other lenses you mention though, so can comment on them compared to each other.

The 80-400 AF-D (original 80-400 version) - pretty slow AF speed. Slowest of the bunch.

70-200 f2.8 VR II (I think that is one you were asking about). Fastest AF speed of the bunch, as would be expected from an expensive pro lens designed with fast AF in mind.

80-400g - quite fast. Not quite as fast as the 70-200, but much closer than the other lenses.

200-500 - average to slowish. Closer to the 80-400AF-d speed than the other two.

You want reach, sharpness and excellent VR? 200-500. You want fast zoom rate and AF speed? 80-400g or 70-200F2.8.

I have some test shots from some of the lenses mentioned above here:

http://www.cjcphoto.net/lenstests/index.html

Myself, I use the 80-400g a lot, because a) it is about the same size as the 70-200 and not much worse, and b) it fits in my (large) waist bag. I basically use it as a substitute for the 70-200 to get more range, unless I'm shooting indoors or in low light.

--
Phoenix Arizona Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

Thank you Craig, that's helpful. I'm looking at pics taken with the 200-500 and they look soft at 500mm, also the iso seems generally higher as it's 5.6. That's good to know it's a bit slow.

I have both the 70 - 300mm 4-something to 5.6 and the 70-200mm 2.8. Both are pretty fast and sharp in daylight. Of course the 70-200mm is faster- but the other is good enough at 1/1600 in daylight. I'd say the 70-300mm ED is a sleeper- this is my favorite lens. I find the 70-200mm a beast in the way it handles depth of field in good light. I shoot speed mode usually.

From your description I'm wondering now if the 200-500mm is slower AF than the 70-300 I have, and if the second 80-400 is about the same.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

dwa1 said:
Whenever asking for lens advice, it would be very helpful (for you and others) to indicate your intended subjects and their lighting conditions. It would also help to indicate which Nikon bodies you would be using. This way people can give you more "targeted-to-your-needs" info.

With that said, based on your info here and your subsequent "edit", I would suggest that you take a look at 2 of Nikon's recent AF-P 70-300 lenses. Most copies of the AF-S 70-300 VR lens are soft over 220mm. So, it is really like having a decent "70-220 VR" lens.

I have a great copy of the AF-P DX 70-300 VR lens. It is sharp at 300mm wide open (f6.3), it has very fast AF, very nice bokeh, a short MFD, it is very light and (imho) it is way under-priced.

Nikon just released an AF-P FX version of the 70-300 VR which should also have good IQ at 300mm. Sample images are just starting to come in here on these DPR forums.

The AF-S 80-400g VR looks to be a great lens - but, as you noticed, it is way over-priced compared to Nikon's recent offerings. With the cropping reach of today's very high resolution sensors, the difference between 300 and 400 is not that great any more.

Hope this helps in some way.

Wayne

Thanks Wayne. I have a D7200. I do have an older 70 - 300mm AF-S ED lens and I love it. I occasionally miss shots with it because of autofocus hunting, but not that many- I'm satisfied with it. On my DX it acts sort of like the "equivalent" of 400mm. This copy is sharp enough at 300mm.

I'd like more reach though. I'm interested in wildlife and rodeo shots mostly. The 70-300mm is fine for large game that isn't too shy, but I miss a lot of birds and smaller animals by the time I get close enough. Even large game are more relaxed at a distance.

OTOH, I'm looking at pics from the 200-500mm right now and some seem soft at 500mm. I'm also hearing the iso drops faster with it- but I tend to shoot in speed mode rather than Aperture mode and up the exposure in PP if needed. But- I dislike higher iso, even with the D7200. Too grainy or not enough detail.

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has the older 70 - 300mm AF-S ED lens, as to whether it is comparable with the older 80-400mm in AF speed.

EDIT lighting conditions vary quite a bit. Sometimes really awful.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

Vince P said:
Lynn876 said:

Has anyone used the 70-300mm ED glass and compared it to either version of the 80-400mm? I'm noticing the prices on the 1st 80-400mm are so much less now. I'm wondering if they are worth it as the first generation ones have a reputation as being slow to focus.

I have the 70-300mm ED lens and love it. It is a little slow in low light, but it's fine. It's actually my favorite lens.

EDIT; Oooh! Just saw that the 200-500mm is actually cheaper than the new 80-400mm. I had no idea. Any feedback on those? I usually shoot in "S" or speed mode- not aperture mode.

Click to expand...

The ED was not usually thought to be one of Nikon's best and nor was the original 80-400. The latest 80-400 is well thought of. The 200-500 also well thought of but may have an Achilles heel in terms of speed to focus. The 70-300 AF-P as has been said is pretty good and focuses well. There is test on Cameralabs where they compare it to the 80-400 which might be useful.

Thanks Vince. That's interesting. My 70-300mm is usually at least as sharp as my 70-200mm 2.8. I must have a good copy. The only time it isn't sharp is in bad light at 300mm at a distance. It's also said to be slow, but I can shoot rodeos at 1/1600 all day long with good light and only miss maybe 3 or 4 that are not my fault because of AF speed.

But, i've heard the first 80-400mm is miserably slow with AF...

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

calson said:
Autofocus with the 80-400mm is noticeably better than the 200-500mm on my D500 camera. Both are f/5.6 in terms of specifications but the 80-400mm with the 1.4x teleconverter will still autofocus on my D500 but not the 200-500mm.

I took the 200-500mm along with the 500mm f/4 on a trip to Alaska last year and it proved to be a mistake. I missed a lot of BIF shots with the 200-500mm lens that I would have gotten with the 80-400mm zoom. My experience is specific to the D500 camera.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

Sorry so late to reply to all- for some reason I wasn't notified of responses although subscribed to thread.

Marianne Oelund · Aug 27, 2017

Lynn876 said:
From your description I'm wondering now if the 200-500mm is slower AF than the 70-300 I have, and if the second 80-400 is about the same.

The latest 80-400 is designed for professional sports use, and I find it keeps up with my sports subjects just fine (figure skaters). I seriously doubt the 70-300 is in the same class.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

Marianne Oelund said:
Lynn876 said:

From your description I'm wondering now if the 200-500mm is slower AF than the 70-300 I have, and if the second 80-400 is about the same.

Click to expand...

The latest 80-400 is designed for professional sports use, and I find it keeps up with my sports subjects just fine (figure skaters). I seriously doubt the 70-300 is in the same class.

Marianne Oelund · Aug 27, 2017

Lynn876 said:
Is the older or newer 80-400mm comparable?

No, you're talking about completely different AF drives. The older 80-400 has body-drive AF, so speed depends on the camera body you're using. That old mechanical system can be fairly fast with pro bodies like the D2-D5 series, but I wouldn't know about the D7200.

Lynn876 said:
How many shots in a session like that would you miss because of the lens' AF?

If I could tell you that, I could also predict what the Dow Jones average will be at close on April 1st, 2019.

Lynn876 · Aug 27, 2017

Marianne Oelund said:
Lynn876 said:

Is the older or newer 80-400mm comparable?

Click to expand...

No, you're talking about completely different AF drives. The older 80-400 has body-drive AF, so speed depends on the camera body you're using. That old mechanical system can be fairly fast with pro bodies like the D2-D5 series, but I wouldn't know about the D7200.

Marianne Oelund said:

How many shots in a session like that would you miss because of the lens' AF?

Click to expand...

If I could tell you that, I could also predict what the Dow Jones average will be at close on April 1st, 2019.

--
Source credit: Prov 2:6
- Marianne

Oh. Thanks, that's helpful. The 70-300 I have is body driven. However, the older 80-400mm is possibly 2-3 times the weight and size... so, it might be slower...

The D7200 is pretty good, but I can't compare it to anything else really, so IDK.

Lynn876 · Aug 28, 2017

Thanks everyone! I did some more searching and found people who had the 70-300 ED (I forgot to mention it was the VR version), & the older and newer 80-400mm. It seems the 70-300mm is much much faster than the old 80-400mm but slower than the new version.

So, I guess I either will save up and get the new version or decide to drag around a tripod and get the 200-500mm. I'll need to scope out more images on the 200-500mm- it looks a bit soft to me and just- IDK, something unnatural. Like the lens is compensating somehow with contrast. Right now I think I'd be better off saving up... IDK yet.

PHXAZCRAIG · Aug 28, 2017

I think you've been told this a few times in the thread but don't seem to want to hear it. The 80-400g (new) AF speed is quite fast - professional level. The 80-400AF-D is quite slow in comparison (my experience with it is with D200, D300 and D700, all of which have decent screwdriver AF speed, probably faster than D7200).

The 200-500 is closer to the 80-400AF-D in terms of AF speed, and because it is a lens-driven AF design, the speed is going to be about the same with all cameras. Basically, it's a leisurely AF. In addition the zoom rate is quite slow - very slow - requiring you to reposition your hand in order to continue zooming from 200 to 500mm.

Just in case you keep thinking the older 80-400AF-D is what you want, because of the lower price compared to the others, you should also realize that the lens is quite soft wide open at 400mm. You have to stop it down to F8 to get it to start being 'sharp', which makes the lens very slow in more than just AF speed.

If you shoot fast-moving sports, you need a lens with fast AF. Only the 80-400g offers that among the lenses you've been considering.

As for the 200-500 being soft at 500mm, most don't think so. It's better than the 80-400g, which is miles better than the 80-400AF-D. If it is not sharp enough, then start looking at the 500F4 or 400F2.8.

dwa1 · Aug 28, 2017

Lynn876 said:
Thanks Wayne. I have a D7200. I do have an older 70 - 300mm AF-S ED lens and I love it. I occasionally miss shots with it because of autofocus hunting, but not that many- I'm satisfied with it. On my DX it acts sort of like the "equivalent" of 400mm. This copy is sharp enough at 300mm.

I'd like more reach though. I'm interested in wildlife and rodeo shots mostly. The 70-300mm is fine for large game that isn't too shy, but I miss a lot of birds and smaller animals by the time I get close enough. Even large game are more relaxed at a distance.

OTOH, I'm looking at pics from the 200-500mm right now and some seem soft at 500mm. I'm also hearing the iso drops faster with it- but I tend to shoot in speed mode rather than Aperture mode and up the exposure in PP if needed. But- I dislike higher iso, even with the D7200. Too grainy or not enough detail.

I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has the older 70 - 300mm AF-S ED lens, as to whether it is comparable with the older 80-400mm in AF speed.

EDIT lighting conditions vary quite a bit. Sometimes really awful.

Hi Lynn.

Based on your info provided here and on the info and replies on your thread, I get the impression that you may be missing some key info that will enable you to get many more AF hits out of your current gear.

First of all, as others have eluded to, you should be getting much better images with your 70-200 f2.8 VR compared to the AF-S 70-300 VR. The 70-200 is a pro lens whereas the AF-S 70-300 VR is a consumer grade lens. About 95% of the people on this forum indicate that their copy of the 70-300 VR lens is soft after 220mm. I tried 4 copies of this lens and each one was soft after 220mm even at f8 with very fast shutter speeds. So, either your idea of a "sharp image" is not quite up to the same standards as others on these forums or something is wrong with your 70-200 f2.8 VR lens and / or your D7200 settings need to be "corrected / refined".

AF Fine Tune... Have you used the D7200 AF Fine Tune feature for ALL of the lenses that you are using (70-200 f2.8 and 70-300 VR)? If not, then I would definitely look into that aspect. One simple setting (for each lens) can have amazing AF accuracy results. You can have one AF Fine Tune setting for each lens and / or lens and TC combo. The camera will remember the specific setting for each of your lenses.

AF Calibration and lens alignment... If your 70-200 f2.8 VR lens has not been serviced, then perhaps you might want to send it in (during your off-season) for lens element adjustment and AF calibration. After sevice, you may need to change the D7200 AF Fine Tune setting for that lens.

AF Settings... For your moving subjects... Ensure that you are using AF-C mode, Dynamic single AF point or Dynamic 9 AF points (not Dynamic Area AF). Set the AF-S and AF-C Focus Priority options (2 settings) to "Focus" (not "Release").

Shutter Speeds... Pixel density... With today's very high pixel density sensors like the one in our D7200 cameras, we must keep the shutter speeds up. Why? Because unlike the previous 12mp sensors (D300), these sensors will "pick up" / capture even the slightest of movements.

Shutter Speeds... ISO... The use of higher ISO settings can be greatly enhanced with a good, dedicated, NR (noise reduction) software ap. I like Topaz DeNoise. Knowing that you can easily clean up any noise with a simple button click within a good NR ap will allow you to use higher ISO values to keep your shutter speeds up.

200-500 VR... With regard to your comments about the 200-500 VR... So many very experienced / knowledgeable people on this forum have shared numerous sharp-at-500mm images from this lens. I would look at several of the previous threads about this lens. Just use the "Search this forum" box at the top of the list of threads to search for 200-500. When the results are displayed, click the "Only in titles" chkbox. You will find lots of great images from that lens.

Here is one thread about the sharpness between 80-400g VR and the 200-500...

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

New AF-P 70-300 lenses... I have the DX version of the new AF-P 70-300 VR lenses. I have a great copy. Unlike Nikon's previous 70-300 lenses, a good copy of this AF-P DX 70-300 VR lens is sharp wide open at 300mm (f6.3). But, unlike the brand new FX model, the DX model does not have an external VR switch. Many Nikon bodies, including our D7200 bodies, are not yet "fully compatible" with these new AF-P lenses. There are problems in AF-C mode with the DX version when the shutter release button is used to initiate AF. Using BB AF is a work-around - but, not a good option for me. We need firmware updates.

If you wanted to get one of these new AF-P 70-300 lenses, then I would suggest the DX non-VR (very cheap) or the new FX VR version. Prior to the announcement of the new FX version, if I had to do it all over again, I would have purchased the non-VR version of the AF-P DX 70-300 lens. These new AF-P lenses have very fast AF and great IQ and bokeh. The DX version has a very short MFD - that makes it great for butterflies.

I hope this helps in some way. Please get back to us if you have made any progress with capturing better images with your current gear.

Wayne

Lynn876 · Aug 28, 2017

dwa1 said:
Hi Lynn.

Based on your info provided here and on the info and replies on your thread, I get the impression that you may be missing some key info that will enable you to get many more AF hits out of your current gear.

First of all, as others have eluded to, you should be getting much better images with your 70-200 f2.8 VR compared to the AF-S 70-300 VR. The 70-200 is a pro lens whereas the AF-S 70-300 VR is a consumer grade lens. About 95% of the people on this forum indicate that their copy of the 70-300 VR lens is soft after 220mm. I tried 4 copies of this lens and each one was soft after 220mm even at f8 with very fast shutter speeds. So, either your idea of a "sharp image" is not quite up to the same standards as others on these forums or something is wrong with your 70-200 f2.8 VR lens and / or your D7200 settings need to be "corrected / refined".

AF Fine Tune... Have you used the D7200 AF Fine Tune feature for ALL of the lenses that you are using (70-200 f2.8 and 70-300 VR)? If not, then I would definitely look into that aspect. One simple setting (for each lens) can have amazing AF accuracy results. You can have one AF Fine Tune setting for each lens and / or lens and TC combo. The camera will remember the specific setting for each of your lenses.

AF Calibration and lens alignment... If your 70-200 f2.8 VR lens has not been serviced, then perhaps you might want to send it in (during your off-season) for lens element adjustment and AF calibration. After sevice, you may need to change the D7200 AF Fine Tune setting for that lens.

AF Settings... For your moving subjects... Ensure that you are using AF-C mode, Dynamic single AF point or Dynamic 9 AF points (not Dynamic Area AF). Set the AF-S and AF-C Focus Priority options (2 settings) to "Focus" (not "Release").

Shutter Speeds... Pixel density... With today's very high pixel density sensors like the one in our D7200 cameras, we must keep the shutter speeds up. Why? Because unlike the previous 12mp sensors (D300), these sensors will "pick up" / capture even the slightest of movements.

Shutter Speeds... ISO... The use of higher ISO settings can be greatly enhanced with a good, dedicated, NR (noise reduction) software ap. I like Topaz DeNoise. Knowing that you can easily clean up any noise with a simple button click within a good NR ap will allow you to use higher ISO values to keep your shutter speeds up.

200-500 VR... With regard to your comments about the 200-500 VR... So many very experienced / knowledgeable people on this forum have shared numerous sharp-at-500mm images from this lens. I would look at several of the previous threads about this lens. Just use the "Search this forum" box at the top of the list of threads to search for 200-500. When the results are displayed, click the "Only in titles" chkbox. You will find lots of great images from that lens.

Here is one thread about the sharpness between 80-400g VR and the 200-500...
https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3952343

New AF-P 70-300 lenses... I have the DX version of the new AF-P 70-300 VR lenses. I have a great copy. Unlike Nikon's previous 70-300 lenses, a good copy of this AF-P DX 70-300 VR lens is sharp wide open at 300mm (f6.3). But, unlike the brand new FX model, the DX model does not have an external VR switch. Many Nikon bodies, including our D7200 bodies, are not yet "fully compatible" with these new AF-P lenses. There are problems in AF-C mode with the DX version when the shutter release button is used to initiate AF. Using BB AF is a work-around - but, not a good option for me. We need firmware updates.

If you wanted to get one of these new AF-P 70-300 lenses, then I would suggest the DX non-VR (very cheap) or the new FX VR version. Prior to the announcement of the new FX version, if I had to do it all over again, I would have purchased the non-VR version of the AF-P DX 70-300 lens. These new AF-P lenses have very fast AF and great IQ and bokeh. The DX version has a very short MFD - that makes it great for butterflies.

I hope this helps in some way. Please get back to us if you have made any progress with capturing better images with your current gear.

Wayne

Hi Wayne, I did fine tune the focal points recently. 3 or 4 shots out of 500 isn't bad I don't think for the AF at a distance at 1/1250 - 1/1600. I miss more than that because of my own fault- not the lens.

it's not that the 2.8 isn't sharp, it's the depth of field. I don't always hit the eyes at 50 or more feet. With the 300 5.6 it generally has a greater depth of field. I shoot in speed mode for rodeos- half the time in bad light so I shoot as open as I can and compensate later. It's sharp enough.

Here are some samples from the 70-300mm VR. in good light. Of course it's not a perfect lens, but for around $350 - 400 used I think it's a very good deal. I'm very happy with it. & of course I'd be very happy with something sharper.

These pics were unsharpened one stop because Capture NX-D sharpens automatically. But they pretty much looked the same in View NX. These were taken with my old D7000.

I will check again on the 200- 500, but in looking here and searching online, the 80-400mm seems sharper to me. It may have something to do with the 200-500 needing more light...

70-300mm VR;

At 220mm

100% crop, click to enlarge

at 300mm

100% crop, click to enlarge I think it's still front focusing an inch or 2 at 300mm.

dwa1 · Aug 28, 2017

Lynn876 said:
Hi Wayne, I did fine tune the focal points recently. 3 or 4 shots out of 500 isn't bad I don't think for the AF at a distance at 1/1250 - 1/1600. I miss more than that because of my own fault- not the lens.

it's not that the 2.8 isn't sharp, it's the depth of field. I don't always hit the eyes at 50 or more feet. With the 300 5.6 it generally has a greater depth of field. I shoot in speed mode for rodeos- half the time in bad light so I shoot as open as I can and compensate later. It's sharp enough.

Here are some samples from the 70-300mm VR. in good light. Of course it's not a perfect lens, but for around $350 - 400 used I think it's a very good deal. I'm very happy with it. & of course I'd be very happy with something sharper.

These pics were unsharpened one stop because Capture NX-D sharpens automatically. But they pretty much looked the same in View NX. These were taken with my old D7000.

I will check again on the 200- 500, but in looking here and searching online, the 80-400mm seems sharper to me. It may have something to do with the 200-500 needing more light...

70-300mm VR;

At 220mm

100% crop, click to enlarge

at 300mm

100% crop, click to enlarge I think it's still front focusing an inch or 2 at 300mm.

Lynn,

I get the impression that you are shooting the 70-200 wide open at f2.8? If so, stop the lens down for more DOF. During AF, the lens will always be focusing at f2.8 - lenses only close the aperture during the shot. I would try your 70-200 lens at f5.6, f6.3 and f7.1 and see how that works for you (after AF Fine Tuning at your most-used FL).

I never shoot my Sigma 150 f2.8 non-OS macro at f2.8 - just not enough DOF - especially for close-ups. Even for distance shots like your recent samples, I would still stop my Sigma lens down to f5.6 or f6.3.

Most people consider the AF-S 70-300 VR an "f8" lens. Looks like you have a "rare" good copy.

For the subjects that you posted... I would only use a single AF point in AF-C mode with AF-C Release Priority set to Focus. Since your D7200 has a decent sized shot buffer, I would shoot at the highest CH speed available.

AF Cross Type sensors... Remember where your camera body's cross-type AF sensors are located. The D7200 has 15 of these. A google of D7200 cross type sensors yielded this set of images for the sensors.

Loading…

www.google.com

Once you get the 70-200 AF Fine Tuned, and you stop the lens down to at least f5.6 and implement the other D7200 settings, you should start getting your best images from this combo.

Hope this helps,

Wayne

Lynn876 · Aug 28, 2017

dwa1 said:
Lynn,

I get the impression that you are shooting the 70-200 wide open at f2.8? If so, stop the lens down for more DOF. During AF, the lens will always be focusing at f2.8 - lenses only close the aperture during the shot. I would try your 70-200 lens at f5.6, f6.3 and f7.1 and see how that works for you (after AF Fine Tuning at your most-used FL).

I never shoot my Sigma 150 f2.8 non-OS macro at f2.8 - just not enough DOF - especially for close-ups. Even for distance shots like your recent samples, I would still stop my Sigma lens down to f5.6 or f6.3.

Most people consider the AF-S 70-300 VR an "f8" lens. Looks like you have a "rare" good copy.

For the subjects that you posted... I would only use a single AF point in AF-C mode with AF-C Release Priority set to Focus. Since your D7200 has a decent sized shot buffer, I would shoot at the highest CH speed available.

AF Cross Type sensors... Remember where your camera body's cross-type AF sensors are located. The D7200 has 15 of these. A google of D7200 cross type sensors yielded this set of images for the sensors.

https://www.google.com/search?q=d72...DkfvVAhUBbxQKHfGeCfYQsAQIhAE&biw=1280&bih=900

Once you get the 70-200 AF Fine Tuned, and you stop the lens down to at least f5.6 and implement the other D7200 settings, you should start getting your best images from this combo.

Hope this helps,

Wayne

Thanks Wayne, this helpful.

"I would only use a single AF point in AF-C mode with AF-C "

Yep, that's what I do. In fact, I think you helped me with that a little while ago.

"AF-C mode with AF-C Release Priority set to Focus." I can't remember which setting I chose- but i did try both out and went for the more functional. I think it is AF-C.

" Since your D7200 has a decent sized shot buffer, I would shoot at the highest CH speed available."

Hmmm.... It's not a very high buffer. I think my D7000 was better- less pixels. I have it on "S" because if I shoot continuous I run out of buffer all the time. Plus it's less shots to delete later & I can easily hit the button twice if needed....

How does one stop down if using speed mode? Is it possible? The only thing I use aperture mode for is landscapes & those have been an afterthought... Will increasing speed stop it down? I don't see any indication in the exif that it does.

I shoot at 1/1600 when I have enough light- this gives me slight movement blur on the front legs of animals, which is usually OK with me. I can try higher speeds but I do prefer ISO's under 400 though- the lower the better. I think the D7200 compensates on the higher iso's with a noise filter. Which I shut off as it was doing crappy things to the images between 400 and 800 iso. It's not supposed to, but it did.

Hmmm.... The only time I use the 70-200mm 2.8 is when I have dim light, and even shooting wide open at lower speeds I usually have to up the exposure 2 or 3 steps in PP. It just doesn't have enough reach in most cases. And the 70-300mm is just really easy to hand hold. It weighs nothing.

"Once you get the 70-200 AF Fine Tuned, and you stop the lens down to at least f5.6 and implement the other D7200 settings, you should start getting your best images from this combo."

The autofocus on the 2.8 is fine tuned to within a half step at midrange.

Both Nikon's 80-400mm's focus speed compared to 70-300mm ?? 2-500?

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Leading Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts