I have the Zeck cap, good product, and after dropping that big chunk of change for the 200f2, I was not going to quibble over $60. I am a LOT more peesed at the cost of replacing the rubber grips on the D series.
Zebrabot wrote:
I guess if one have no intention of using a camera and lense, some crazy modificiation for tetrising them into a backpack is great.
It's weird if you ask me.
I've seen much less practicable gear-modifications.
Ryan - hats off to your skillfully done hood-mod! The UD 35 is a nice bag, but my fav for the 200/2 is still the GlassTaxi.
The 200/2 with hood in shooting position, a D7000/D700/D3s and a TC14/TC17 in the middle will fit nicely in.
A small detachable front-bag holds a small camera (X100) and a small lens like the 85/1.8 or 105/1.8.
I am so psyched to have gotten my very own chub to use with my D600. It's a VRI, but I was curious if roughly 3200 USD is a good price for it? How much do these go for these days?
She is indeed. The weather is improving in the UK now so she'll hopefully get a good seeing to. Took her out at the weekend for a shoot with my baby daughter but didn't end up using it. Was a 4 kg dead weight over my shoulder!!!
I'm trying to figure out why someone would opt for a 200 fixed when it's basically covered in the 70-200 area, and not just go the 300> 2.8? The half stop difference can't be the draw card here.
John Skinner wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why someone would opt for a 200 fixed when it's basically covered in the 70-200 area, and not just go the 300> 2.8? The half stop difference can't be the draw card here.
First of all, it's a full stop difference, and secondly, while the Nikkor 70-200/2.8 is a very good lens, it's not on par with the 200/2G--that's the draw card!
John Skinner wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why someone would opt for a 200 fixed when it's basically covered in the 70-200 area, and not just go the 300> 2.8? The half stop difference can't be the draw card here.
it's a FULL stop, John...and I can't think of any lens I'd rather shoot. Ask around...fastest focusing
lens out there and the bokeh/destroyed BG's are a thing to behold.
John Skinner wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why someone would opt for a 200 fixed when it's basically covered in the 70-200 area, and not just go the 300> 2.8? The half stop difference can't be the draw card here.
Once you try it, the answer becomes quite apparent.
trust me 
it's a FULL stop, John...and I can't think of any lens I'd rather shoot. Ask around...fastest focusing
