| Joined: | Wed Apr 18th, 2012 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 4186 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
Well I guess I stick with what I have.
D3, D3S, D600, D800 is good enough for anything I do.
My wallet is tighter than a Aberdonian from Yorkshire!
I want that new Nikon 200-500mm to complete my lens line up.
I'm getting very cynical in my old age. I would want to try a 200-500 before buying.
I hope he won't mind me saying....but I watched Graham reporting on the 80 -400. I even considered selling my 500mm being wooed with the thought of huge weight saving. But then I saw Graham being dissatisfied with the performance of that lens....as his specific requirement of bird photography challenged it. He then bought a prime.
I haven't heard how he is doing with that lens but I am willing to bet he will be finding it better for his needs.
So what needs does the 200-500 fill? How is that going to be different to the 80-400 ( apart from the extra 100mm) in terms of compromise over a prime.
Can't actually believe I am saying this, being the owner of many zooms....but there is no doubt that there is a trade off in quality when zooming. The 200-500 may be an extremely convenient, lightweight tool in your a**enal...but will it have the exacting quality of a 200, 300, 400, or 500mm ? Or will it just be 'good enough at the price'?
____________________
Eric