| Sign in: |
| Members log in here with your user name and password to access the your admin page and other special features. |
|
|
|
|
|| SportsShooter.com: Member Message Board
Nikon 200-400/4 Losing Focus?
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
 |
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 10:19 PM on 05.16.09 |
| ->> This is disappointing, but I have to ask. Here is the setup. Nikon D3 with the 200-400/4. I have been saving up for this lens and was ready to buy it. Was quit pleased NPS had it at the Preakness and I figured I would try it out. The lens is very sharp, but I started to run into a problem. As I started to back the lens up to keep the action full-frame the lens just stopped following the image it had been tracking. I really wanted to buy this lens, but now I have reservations. This happen to anyone else? (note: switched bodies mid-way and it still did it). |
|
Bryan Hulse, Photographer
|
Nashville | Tn | USA | Posted: 10:25 PM on 05.16.09 |
->> Hi Scott. I've used the 200-400 with both the D2x and D3. I love the lens.
However, my first copy was way soft everywhere. I had it replaced with a new copy.
My next copy was OK but not very sharp at f4.0. I used it that way for a year or so and finally sent it in. They fixed it and it was great wide open.
Then the VR went CLUNK one day at a football game and the lens stopped working. I had it fixed again.
Now, it works great, tracks great, is sharp and just a fantastic lens.
My point is, if it doesn't work the way you expect, it's possible there is something wrong with that particular lens, and it may need some maintenance. The D3 AF should easily be able to make that lens sing.
Interestingly, my problems with the 200-400 are the only ones I've had with any Nikon lens (other than some occasional cleaning after beating a lens up for years). |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 11:20 PM on 05.16.09 |
| ->> My buddy had the 300/2.8 and the stuff from that lens looked like HD compared to my rabbit ears. I think the 300/2.8 by Nikon might be the mst ridiculously sharp an clear lens I have ever seen. The 200-400, well, the verdict is still out. |
|
Will Lester, Photographer
|
Ontario | CA | USA | Posted: 12:41 AM on 05.17.09 |
| ->> My paper got this lens just after it was first released, 4-5 years ago? I have used it on every possible Nikon body, from the D1H through the D3, and have not had one single problem with it. It is virtually the only lens I use for sports, even with a 1.4. This is by far one of the best lenses ever produced, by any manufacturer. You may have just got one with a glitch. |
|
Pouya Dianat, Photographer
|
Atlanta | GA | | Posted: 1:47 AM on 05.17.09 |
->> Shot all football season and all baseball season with D3's + 200-400 + 600. Never had a problem with the 200-400 as Will says, it's an amazing lens. I know other people who use it religiously and I've never heard a peep from them either.
First thing to check was what was your AF tracking on? Short, Normal or Long? If it was Long. Take a look, that could be your other problem. If not I'd recommend sending it in as well.
Hope this helps. |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 9:08 AM on 05.17.09 |
| ->> At least I am getting the feedback I was looking for. I am interested in buying this and having been saving for it. I know this was a Nikon/NPS loaner lens, so who knows how it has been abused. I just wanted to see if this was a rampant problem or just an aberration with the lens I borrowed. TY. |
|
Matt Brown, Photographer
|
Fullerton | CA | USA | Posted: 12:08 PM on 05.17.09 |
| ->> I have had it from day one. Never had a problem. Sharp and little weight. My D3's love the lens. You can't go wrong with it. |
|
Robert Hanashiro, Photographer
 |
Los Angeles | CA | | Posted: 6:28 PM on 05.17.09 |
->> I've had the 200-400 since we made "the switch" over a year ago and this lens has been a dream. I've used it on the D3, D300 and D700 bodies and it has performed well on all of them.
It is versatile and incredibly sharp ... including combined with the TC14 and TC17.
You must have received a bad lens or it was knocked around. Did it have this problem on just one camera body? Or have you experienced this using it with other bodies as well? |
|
Scott Serio, Photo Editor, Photographer
|
Colora | MD | USA | Posted: 6:50 PM on 05.17.09 |
| ->> Yes, the Nikon rep on scene switched bodies, so it was the lens. Just really odd. And, as I said, I have heard such rave reviews before I was shocked when this happened. But I also realize the "NPS loaner" aspect of it. It seems I may have just borrowed one that was previously abused. Thank you for the feedback. |
|
Jeff Mills, Photographer, Photo Editor
|
Columbus | OH | USA | Posted: 8:09 PM on 05.17.09 |
->> Scott, its a fantastic lens if you can live without it being f2.8. I shoot about 50% night games on fields with less than stellar lighting so I'm frequently at 1/500th, f2.8 and ISO6400 so I bought a 400 2.8 instead. I'd still love a 200-400 though for whenever I have enough light. Its razor sharp and the zoom versatility is very nice to have, especially for a sport like soccer where you don't want to clip off a foot.
I'm lucky enough to get to shoot back and forth with my 400 2.8 and a buddies 200-400 f4 and unless the lighting is getting dim, the AF works fantastic on that lens. Obviously when its getting dim and the AF system is getting 50% less light you'll notice it though, but thats true for any slower lens.
Don't worry yourself over single bad experience as they can happen with any product. For example just because your riding in a Toyota and it breaks down, you wouldn't assume they build unreliable cars as a whole. Being a loaner lens it no doubt had some issues with it, maybe even just some dirty contacts.
As Robert said as well, this lens works very well with TC's, even the 1.7x, which is no small feat for a zoom lens.
Its the ideal combination of range, size/weight, apeture and image quality for any sport where you have the light. Only drawback is the price really. Its not a cheap lens and you'd also ideally still want to have something like a 300 2.8 if your going to be shooting indoors or night games. |
|
Daniel Rosenstein, Photographer
|
Falls Church | Va | USA | Posted: 12:25 AM on 05.21.09 |
| ->> Scott, This is an amazing lens that I have owned since it was released. Never had any problems with it. Highly recommended. It is one of the best lenses that Nikon has built in recent years. It's cheaper than the 400 f2.8 and more versatile. Think of it as a larger but slower version of the 70-200. If you like zoom lenses, then buy it because it's a good value for the money. |
|
Jeff Snyder, Photographer
|
Metro DC Region | MD | USA | Posted: 9:47 PM on 05.24.09 |
->> Scott-
FWIW, Mine has been tack sharp since day one as well.... |
|
Return to --> Message Board Main Index
|