200-400/4 ED - Worth It?

[jhinkey]

The lens is in the UK so I have to get up early to call them with a CC number . . .

[jhinkey]

Except for the marks left from the locking pin from rotating the camera a little roughly, it looks fine!


Collectors will not like with the wear on the body, so the lens will not hold its value in the same way,,,,

Well, I didn't plan on it being a collector's item, but rather a working lens.  If it just keeps its current value I'd be happy with that.
I see these going for $4,000 USD - I assume those are the mint, in box collectors items.

Is $2400 too much to pay for this copy then?

[Erik Lund]

There was also added A/M to the focus option - The first version was: M/A and M only,,,

I think there was a small difference in the lens collar as well but not sure it was for the 200mm AFS f/2 or another lens now,,,

Here is the old thread;
http://www.fotozones.com/live/index.php?/forums/topic/28806-got-the-new-2002-afs-g-vr2-n-today/
For those with access I guess,,,


0,5mm difference in length and collar was changed,,,

[Erik Lund]

Well, I didn't plan on it being a collector's item, but rather a working lens.  If it just keeps its current value I'd be happy with that.
I see these going for $4,000 USD - I assume those are the mint, in box collectors items.

Is $2400 too much to pay for this copy then?

The thing is not many would consider this lens as a working lens imho,,,


I payed that for the 200/2 AFS, and if you add a couple of TC-E's your at 280/2.8 and 400/4,,, but that is AF VR etc.


Only you can answer what you need,,, you will have to add tax/vat for import?

[jhinkey]

Well, I don't need AF as this is for landscapes.  My 400/5.6 ED AI is my working lens for this, but is sometimes too slow and sometimes I only need 200mm, then I want 400mm.

So I was mainly going for the f/4 capability IF this lens is sharp wide open across the frame at 36MP.  If I have to stop it down to f/5.6 then I might as well stay with my 400/5.6 ED AI and 180/3.4 Telyt.  Though tremendously sharp, the Telyt does not like being pointed anywhere near the sun and it doesn't like making nice sun stars.

- John

[jhinkey]

So Bjorn - since I want to use this at f/4 a lot, how is this lens shot wide open for landscape-type sharpness across the frame at the various focal lengths?  To get the excellent sharpness that you showed in some of your images I don't want to have to stop it down.

Thanks -

John

[Bjørn Rørslett]

As long as you don't need any depth of field, like taking a picture of a mountain range on the horizon, shooting at f/4 probably would work well enough. However, that is not my normal style when using a long lens for landscapes.

However, no procedure without a break to it, thus I'll give the f/4 a spin. Over the weekend I might be able to test-run the 200-400 at wide open for more regular landscapes, though, if our weather deities  are condescending enough.

Still, I consider shooting at f/11 and mounting the lens on a really good tripod is the better approach.

[jhinkey]

As long as you don't need any depth of field, like taking a picture of a mountain range on the horizon, shooting at f/4 probably would work well enough. However, that is not my normal style when using a long lens for landscapes.

However, no procedure without a break to it, thus I'll give the f/4 a spin. Over the weekend I might be able to test-run the 200-400 at wide open for more regular landscapes, though, if our weather deities  are condescending enough.

Still, I consider shooting at f/11 and mounting the lens on a really good tripod is the better approach.

Bjorn -

Thanks - I would indeed appreciate any wide open distant images - f/11 is not for me as most of my landscape shots are at dusk or dawn and there is usually a moving element in the image - ship, ferry, waves, clouds, etc. and that's why I want f/4 capability - to get the shutter speed up and/or ISO down when image movement is a factor.
Also, when shooting lights at night and wanting sunstars, one usually needs to stop down one from wide open and if wide open is f/5.6 that can be a problem sometimes when f/8 is too slow or too high an ISO for what's going on.

Most of my subjects are many miles away so 400mm DOF at f/4 is just fine most of the time.

EDIT:  One could say the 400/3.5 is for me, but I've not been impressed with that lens when I tried one copy out as Bjorn previously alluded to.

400/5.6 ED-AI at f/8, 4 sec, ISO 100

[Akira]

John, sorry for the side-tracking in my previous posts.  And sorry again: your ideal lens appears to be that monstrous Sigma 200-500/2.8...

Beautiful nightscape, by the way.

[jhinkey]

John, sorry for the side-tracking in my previous posts.  And sorry again: your ideal lens appears to be that monstrous Sigma 200-500/2.8...

Beautiful nightscape, by the way.

No problem on the side-tracking - it happens when people are passionate about stuff!

I think the 200-500/2.8 may be a little over-the top for my needs

[Erik Lund]

Beautiful shot, Super!

[jhinkey]

Beautiful shot, Super!

Thanks!

[MFloyd]

jhinkey, one of my preferred ones. 👍🏻😊

[jhinkey]

jhinkey, one of my preferred ones. 👍🏻😊

Does that mean the 200-400 ED AIS is one of your preferred lenses?  Or are you referring to my example picture?

Thanks -

John

[jhinkey]

As long as you don't need any depth of field, like taking a picture of a mountain range on the horizon, shooting at f/4 probably would work well enough. However, that is not my normal style when using a long lens for landscapes.

However, no procedure without a break to it, thus I'll give the f/4 a spin. Over the weekend I might be able to test-run the 200-400 at wide open for more regular landscapes, though, if our weather deities  are condescending enough.

Still, I consider shooting at f/11 and mounting the lens on a really good tripod is the better approach.

Bjorn -

Did you get a chance to shoot some wide open long-distance shots with this lens over the weekend.
Anything you can do would be greatly appreciated.

- John