Upload & Sell: Off
| p.1 #15 · Nikon Equivilent of Canon 400 f/5.6? |
I think I should be more specific. It is important for the camera and lens to be able to photograph explosive action with at least 400mm of focal length at a comparable price to the Canon Equivalent (7d + 400 f/5.6). Even if it costs a bit more that is okay, just so long as it is not substantially more.
I know with Nikon you pay more perhaps for better quality or perhaps because Nikon does not have it's tentacles in everything like Canon so they may not be able to offer the same price point. Which is fine, it is what it is and I will just have to wait till I can afford Nikon perhaps. I do know that at this point I am fed up with the Canon Service/repair department and do not want to contribute to the company any longer (it has really left a bad taste in my mouth).
Would the D700 + 300 f/4 AFS and 1.4 TC II (no TC III yet correct) be capable of great AF in order to capture explosive action.
To be even more specific do you think that combo could capture images similar to the ones on the second page here (3rd wigeon shot down, the diving red head and Pied billed grebe shots).
Thanks so much for everyone's input, very appreciated!
I owned this combo and just about lived behind it for a few years. the 300 alone will be faster to AF and will have better IQ without the converter in place despite what some will write.
that being said it is no slouch whatsoever in either department with the converter in place.
IQ of the naked lens is fantastic, even wide open. IMHO it was almost sharp as my 500mm VR and focused as fast.
In reasonable light i don't think the combo will hold you back, especially on a D700. Plus you'll have the option of a 300mm if need be.
I sold this lens a year or so after i bought my 500mm VR and regret doing so. It is the only lens i've ever regretted selling.