1. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Although my 200-500mm is rarely off my camera, I have found a major fault with mine, it has now jammed at 400mm and will only travel to 500mm and back, why I say it is a major problem is this is the second time this has happened, and also I've read reports of this happening to others, and know personally one other who it's happened to, it was repaired by Nikon last time they replaced the parts so it's not had a inferior repair :-( so no more shots like the one below for a while if ever I've not decided yet, if I'm going to cut my losses and invest in a 200-400mm f/4, I really don't want to as the cost and weight factor are against me doing it, but I can't see the point having a lens that constantly needs repair :-(


    [​IMG]
     
  2. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Sorry to hear that - I’m now trying not to worry about mine!
     
  3. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Just out of interest - this weekend I’ve carried out the autofocus fine tune adjustment with my 200-500mm on my D500 body.
    It needed +14 - I would be interested to hear of other users experiences?
    I’ve not had chance yet to test for any differences in image quality.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2018
  4. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I shouldn't worry too much unless you use the lens every day as I do, mine is constantly in use :)
     
    Malfis likes this.
  5. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mine was +6 at approx 20 yards tested :)
     
  6. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Mine was plus 5 at 500mm.

    It’s about time Nikon gave your option of adjusting at both ends of the range,
     
    gcgraphs likes this.
  7. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    32,401
    Edit My Images:
    No
    That's bad news, I haven't had a hint of such problems with mine, it's a brilliant lens and I prefer it to the 200-400 f4 that I used to have.
    As a matter of interest, where did you get it and was it bought new?
     
  8. kingo15

    kingo15

    Messages:
    1,911
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    How many times did you do it
     
  9. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    What method did you use to tune it.
     
  10. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I did it 6 times at each of 200mm, 350mm and 500mm - so 18 in total. I then took off the bottom and top readings and did an average of the rest.


    I used the “autofocus fine tune” feature on the menu of the D500.
     
  11. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Sorry I missed that you’d already stated that.

    I did mine manually as I do with all my lenses using a home made set up at the focal length that I use most which is 500mm. I then checked it at 200,300,400mm to see it there was any significant variation.
     
  12. kingo15

    kingo15

    Messages:
    1,911
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Dam that must of been way out for an average of +14
     
  13. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Apparently we should not get alarmed by these figures. All the lenses will be within manufacturing tolerances and these adjustments we make are microscopic - thats why there is a variation between the numbers when we do the tests, and then take an average.
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
    gcgraphs likes this.
  14. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I got it from London Camera Exchange at Derby and brought it new gramps, the first time it happened it was repaired under insurance and they disputed the problem as it was intermittent so it took 10 months to get it fixed going back and forth, this time it will be straight to Nikon and it has locked solid, an interesting point I learned from the first repair, Nikon do not supply parts for the 200-500 mm to their authorized repairers like Fixation, that may have changed now it's just over a year ago it was first repaired, I'm waiting for Nikon to reply from my enquiry as to weather they will stand the cost or part cost of this repair :-(
     
  15. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I have the Spyder Lenscal :)
     
  16. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    So was your Camera/lens front focusing quite a lot?
     
  17. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I use that also but I find my home made set up easier although takes a bit longer to set up.

    Shame your having problems with yours. For the money it seems to be a nice little lens. Has become my walk about lens.
     
  18. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    No - I reckon that if Nikon provide the facility to get a lens absolutely spot on, we might as well use it!
     
  19. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Malcolm, if your camera/lens wasn’t front or back focusing noticably then I would be wary of doing any adjustment on it especially that amount which is quite a lot. None of my lenses across Canon and Nikon have more than +/- 7 and without a converter none have an MA of more than +/- 5.

    When I get a new lens I give it a quick test by pinning something to the fence, in this case I borrow one of my wife seed packets out of her garden shed, put the camera on a tripod and take a few shots wide open. I’m shooting from around 17 metres which is probably the longest distance that I use the camera at normally. Then I check the result. If I can read the writing on the bottom of the packet, which is about 2mm high then there’s not a lot wrong with the calibration. As a second check I set the MA to - 10 and repeat and then + 10 and repeat. I’m expecting to see both results being soft. From these three tests I can usually tell if there’s a need to MA it and, if so, which way to go with the adjustment.
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2018
    kingo15 and Malfis like this.
  20. gcgraphs

    gcgraphs

    Messages:
    348
    Name:
    GC
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    :agree: Plus the body has manufacturing tolerances too. I get a different Fine Tune value for the same lens when swapped between 2 x D500's.

    GC
     
    Malfis likes this.
  21. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mines never off the camera that may be the problem over use lol

    [​IMG]
     
    Phil-D, gad-westy and gcgraphs like this.
  22. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Never thought about that!
     
  23. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    32,401
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Drives a horse and cart through the Consumer Protection laws IMO ... faulty lens and in the end you may well end up picking up the tab! :(
     
  24. Phil-D

    Phil-D

    Messages:
    5,890
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well I haven't swapped camps just yet, but I've bought a secondhand 200-500 from a forum member yesterday :)

    Haven't had a chance to get to grips with it proper but thought I'd stick the 1.4 ii tc on it and see how it performed.

    It was clearly front focusing and needed -18 with the tc fitted, -8 without

    Messing around, this was shot at 1/320 , f11 ISO 1600, VR on, hand held with tc fitted.

    Rattled a few off and they all seemed sharp enough, looking forward to trying some bif, hopefully in some good light

    sparrow.jpg
     
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2018
    SFTPhotography and gramps like this.
  25. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Looks pretty good to me.
     
  26. Phil-D

    Phil-D

    Messages:
    5,890
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Cheers

    I'm sending me Sigma off for a well deserved service, its worked hard for me over the last two years.

    When I get it back I'll do some controlled test, one will be going up for sale, just not sure which yet but I'm definitely impressed with the Nikon @ 700mm, 1/320th hand held
     
    Malfis likes this.
  27. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Well Nikon have diagnosed the problem with my lens LOL :)

    [​IMG]
     
  28. toohuge

    toohuge

    Messages:
    211
    Edit My Images:
    Yes

    Wow!!!! You must use it a lot! I think the 2-400 f4 is a pro lens so you’d hope that lasts longer!
    I’ve had a few of the af-d lenses wear out on me. They go sloppy but still work ok! Hope Nikon look after you on this one.
     
  29. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    It's a 200-500 mm and I use it every day, but I don't mistreat it and it has been repaired once for the same problem, I think it is a poor quality part or a poor design problem, hopefully I'll get it fixed, I have asked the question "are Nikon prepared to stand some or all of the cost" and funnily enough I've not had a straight answer yet :)
     
  30. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    32,401
    Edit My Images:
    No
    How old is the lens?
    Does that actually mean 'lens worn out' or is the hyphen in the wrong place and it should be 'VR worn out'?
    If it's been repaired once, how long ago?
     
  31. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I got the lens back June 2016 the last time gramps, I must stress the lengthily repair wasn't Nikons fault, it was a combination of BeValued (the insures assessors and repairers) and Fixation who they sent the lens to, at the time Nikon didn't release parts for the 200-500 mm even to their authorised repairers like Fixation, all repairs to the lens had be done at Nikon and they weren't, they argued there was no problem with the slide mechanism, as soon as Nikon got it the fault was noted on the slide mechanism and the part replaced at a cost of over £300 (paid by the insurers) , this process took 10 months in total, the lens was returned to me 5 times still with the fault and once Bevalued sent me a Canon 500mm f/4 by mistake, and when I phoned to say they had sent the wrong bloody lens (the exact words I used), I was told to stop using and I quote "foul and abusive language" I wasn't even permitted a "bloody" after 10 months of sorting it out !!!!..... you've done it now gramps you've got me moaning LOL :)
     
  32. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    32,401
    Edit My Images:
    No
    I think I would be moaning after that experience ... "We take our customer complaints very seriously" :D
    I guess after 2 years since the repair you have little chance of getting anything from Nikon :(
     
  33. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I didn't think it was as long ago as that gramps until I checked when you asked , so I think your right, no harm in asking though lol :)
     
    gramps likes this.
  34. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    I've just had my quote for repair from Nikon, the fault this time is exactly the same as last time, but no mention of the slide mechanism being rplaced this time as there was last time it was repaired at over £300, the quote this time is for £160 a much more reasonable price :) I sent them video's of the fault from both times it happened, that may have helped with the lower quote :)

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2018
    gramps likes this.
  35. crieffy

    crieffy

    Messages:
    1,225
    Name:
    John Moncrieff
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    My 200-500's zoom also locked solid a few weeks ago - stuck at 220ish. Quoted £300 for a repair by Nikon. Not very impressed! Currently using a 200-400mm - less reach, and heavy, and long enough that it won't fit in my bag - but the images are brilliant (soft at f4 at distance though)
    And my 24-85 also had jammed aperture blades - another £200!! bought new two years ago and rarely used.
     
  36. wanilson

    wanilson

    Messages:
    1,011
    Name:
    Ian
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    There are a few reports out there of the 200-500 mm locking up yours is the first I've heard of not not doing it at 400mm, as for your quote that was what mine was the first time around as I said so I'm happy at £ 160 :)
     
    crieffy likes this.
  37. gramps

    gramps

    Messages:
    32,401
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Is there any pattern to the age of these lenses exhibiting this problem?
     
  38. crieffy

    crieffy

    Messages:
    1,225
    Name:
    John Moncrieff
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Mine’s nearly two years old - certainly not abused, and never had a bad knock as far as I can recall.
     
    gramps likes this.
  39. Gaz J

    Gaz J

    Messages:
    3,334
    Name:
    Gary
    Edit My Images:
    No
    Just a thought. Does anyone carry the lens extended? I tend to keep mine at the shortest length. Just habit.
     
  40. Malfis

    Malfis

    Messages:
    665
    Name:
    Malcolm
    Edit My Images:
    Yes
    Always at shortest possible length.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice