I have been toying around with the idea of getting a 200-400VR for sometime now. After selling my 300mm f/2.8 AF-I last year, I miss having a long lens, but if I am to get another one, I would like something that will fullfill my needs. I am thinking that I will sell my D90 sometime in the next month, and pickup a D300s, and I am wondering if anyone has had a chance to play with the D300s or D300 and 200-400VR? How does it all handle, and would you recommend the combo. Are there any cons of the 200-400, as I haven't really read many dislikes about this lens. I am just starting to do some more serious research on people's opinion's of the 200-400. I also have the D700, and occasionally will use the D700 and the 200-400. Thank you, and appologies if there is already a similar posting.
I shot with this combo for the nationals superbike weekend here in calgary...it's quite the combination. personally I'm a bigger fan of the 300 2.8, but that's entirely a subjective opinion, I just find it to be that little bit sharper, and faster to focus. Don't get me wrong, you'll never be disappointed with the 200-400.
It's not something that's a lot of fun to hand hold, but it is possible for some time(I generally shoot from a mono pod). I am by no means a pro photographer, but here's a couple galleries...everything from the saturday and sunday was shot with the 200-400.
The sharpness of the 2-4 cannot be beat at close distances and the close-focusing feature (2.0m) of this lens is great (I use it for dragonflies). It performs well at longer distances too but it can't compete with primes when the chips are down and doesn't take TC's nearly as well (both in terms of IQ and AF speed).
The only thing you might want to think about is whether the 300VR (2.8) would be more suitable. Aside from superior IQ and AF, you get better subject isolation from the shallower DOF with the 300VR. But of course no zoom.
I do like the combo but I normally shoot at daylight but notice when you are shooting at low light af is a little slower. It's normal for f4, maybe because I'm used to my 300/2.8vr and will get it again one of these days. The best is the flexibility to zoom. I can set up at one spot and enjoy a variety of crop or wide sport shots.
I put easily 50,000 clicks through a D300/200-400 pair. Loved it to death. No cons to the lens at all... it's the lightest of the big guns except for the 300/2.8, it's the cheapest way to get those focal lengths, it's excellent optically, and I disagree with some comments above... I've never even been able to detect a difference between images with or without the 1.4x TC.
