Author Topic: Concerns with 200-500mm  (Read 8003 times)

Mongo

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • You ARE NikonGear
Concerns with 200-500mm
« on: December 14, 2016, 01:43:32 »


Just a quick heads up about an issue with this lens. Mongo bought it new in Oct 2015. By September, 2016 he noticed that the lens was not rotating smoothly inside its collar while on the tripod/monopod. It felt like it was catching and then jerking free on rotation.

Took it to Nikon under warranty. From memory, it took about 6 weeks to repair it. Nikon had no replacements parts. The lens should have been replaced but Nikon decided to cannibalise a replacement collar/foot from a new lens they had on hand. Not sure if the small brass pins under the collar required changing also but in the end, Mongo thinks only the collar was changed (which showed some wear). This part of the warranty process was not what was expected and was disappointing.

When Mongo first reviewed this lens he considered that the collar and foot were “OK’ for the job - neither great nor inadequate. From memory, Bjorn thought the foot/mount arrangement was not adequate. At the time Mongo was only talking about the steadiness/movement of the foot/collar to do the job. However, Mongo had noticed that there seem to be a lot of cantilevered weight on this assembly; particularly when fully extended to 500mm. Time has shown Bjorn to be more correct about this assessment.

As a result of what occurred, the “fit for purpose” design and specifications of the collar/foot mount have to be in question. Mongo’s 200-500 gets medium amateur use only and still, the parts appear to have worn out long before they should have.

The only good thing about the experience (if there can be any) was that Mongo was told that they (Nikon) would not be looking too closely at the warranty period if this happens again and it will be replaced should it reoccur. Mongo hopes Nikon remembers its undertaking if he does have to take it back for the same issue in future.

Hope others have better luck with their copies after some use.

Ilkka Nissilä

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1714
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #1 on: December 14, 2016, 11:23:07 »
I think the Kirk collar  for this lens is very good and includes the dovetail for mounting on Arca-Swiss style heads. 

Frank Fremerey

  • engineering art
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12636
  • Bonn, Germany
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #2 on: December 14, 2016, 15:17:08 »
Thank you, both!
You are out there. You and your camera. You can shoot or not shoot as you please. Discover the world, Your world. Show it to us. Or we might never see it.

Me: https://youpic.com/photographer/frankfremerey/

PeterN

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1125
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #3 on: December 14, 2016, 17:09:39 »
Peter

ColinM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 2000
  • Herefordshire, UK
    • My Pictures
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #4 on: December 14, 2016, 21:53:27 »
Any comments from Elsa on this feature?
She seems to have used her 200-500 quite a bit since getting it.

Mongo

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #5 on: December 14, 2016, 22:31:23 »
I think the Kirk collar  for this lens is very good and includes the dovetail for mounting on Arca-Swiss style heads.

Thank you Ilkka. Yes, that would be the long term fix if this problems proves to be universal in this lens. Mongo has already changed the collar and foot on the AFS 300 f4 to an after market brand ("the really right stuff" brand) which is quite good.

Just as a thought, maybe a tiny smear of vaseline (or similar) between the collar and lens barrel (where they rotate against each other) would help reduce wear and increase smoothness ???

Any comments from Elsa on this feature?
She seems to have used her 200-500 quite a bit since getting it.

Elsa is very experienced and her comments and views on this would be very welcomed and helpful. She seems to use her copy probably as much as Mongo. Wondering if others have noticed anything of this nature also. Although, signs are not likely to show until it has had some amount of use. It took a year to show up in Mongo's copy.

MILLIREHM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Vienna, Austria
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2016, 22:35:53 »
the collar should have some rings for a lens strap. The lens is too heavy for hanging on the cameras bayonet
Wolfgang Rehm

Mongo

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2016, 22:44:30 »
the collar should have some rings for a lens strap. The lens is too heavy for hanging on the cameras bayonet

this is also true. There are a number of features that could be improved. Mongo got the impression from Nikon when having his lens repaired, that Nikon would rethink the collar design (and probably others) when designing version II of this lens in future.  It would seem unwise not to.

PedroS

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 412
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2016, 23:38:01 »
When removable, I always replace the original foot/lens colar to a RRS/Kirk/Markins in all my Nikons

Look here
http://www.photoproshop.com/Lens-Gear/Lens-Holder/Kirk-Lens-support-bracket-for-Nikon-200-500mm.html
To this type of lens, where the leverage is so high on the colar, a front support is a much better solution.
Don't recommend any type of lubricant, as it will sooner than later, be covered with dust with catastrophic results...  :-X

Mongo

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 844
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #9 on: December 15, 2016, 02:02:16 »
When removable, I always replace the original foot/lens colar to a RRS/Kirk/Markins in all my Nikons

Look here
http://www.photoproshop.com/Lens-Gear/Lens-Holder/Kirk-Lens-support-bracket-for-Nikon-200-500mm.html
To this type of lens, where the leverage is so high on the colar, a front support is a much better solution.
Don't recommend any type of lubricant, as it will sooner than later, be covered with dust with catastrophic results...  :-X

thanks Pedro. The gadget on your link will definitely help take the weight and pressure off the collar and give it longer life. Agree about the lubricant but feel it is very contained and sheltered in the location - possibly enough to not to draw and hold dust. However, better to be cautious as you have indicated.

David H. Hartman

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 2790
  • I Doctor Photographs... :)
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2016, 08:12:56 »
IDon't recommend any type of lubricant, as it will sooner than later, be covered with dust with catastrophic results...  :-X

How about pure Teflon, no oil, wax or soap just Teflon in a liquid vehicle that evaporates leaving only the Teflon?

Dave Hartman
Beatniks are out to make it rich
Oh no, must be the season of the witch!

PedroS

  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 412
  • You ARE NikonGear
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2016, 10:00:25 »
How about pure Teflon, no oil, wax or soap just Teflon in a liquid vehicle that evaporates leaving only the Teflon?

Dave Hartman

Dave, have tried a Wurth dry lub teflon based, but results were not worthwhile.
Nothing beats a "normal" lub type, favoring moli or pure silicon paste on it, but from my experience, better to have a dedicated third-party colar and, when a big leverage is present, some sort of front/rear support.

Frank Fremerey

  • engineering art
  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 12636
  • Bonn, Germany
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #12 on: December 15, 2016, 10:04:28 »
I would generally appreciate if Mongo would write more about his experience with the lens (all other aspects). I had some trouble with the long zoom throw that generally was very slow to move for example. In the end I exchanged the lens for the 4/300PF because I had to much trouble and was generally demotivated to carry the 2300g while the 750g of the 300PF are with me very often.
You are out there. You and your camera. You can shoot or not shoot as you please. Discover the world, Your world. Show it to us. Or we might never see it.

Me: https://youpic.com/photographer/frankfremerey/

John G

  • "Borrowed a Little Light"
  • NG Member
  • *
  • Posts: 319
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #13 on: December 15, 2016, 17:30:58 »
Hi Mongo
.            I have seen a Part from Mengs ( Gumptrade ).
The item is a L200, quotes it is a Telephoto Zoom Support.
Have not seen a suggested zoom range, worth a look at though.
John Gallagher

MILLIREHM

  • NG Supporter
  • **
  • Posts: 863
  • Vienna, Austria
Re: Concerns with 200-500mm
« Reply #14 on: December 15, 2016, 18:07:49 »
I decided to go for the 80-400 mm instead
Wolfgang Rehm