Upload & Sell: Off
| p.6 #19 · Official: Nikon 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G AF-S VR released! |
I was really excited about this lens but to be honest, I'm not so sure now.
What has put you off of it? The samples I am seeing are pretty much exactly what I hoped for given its size/weight/price.
It will be prove useful for a long-reach travel lens as it's compact and relatively light when put on the scale with its peers but if you're not constrained by weight and size, there's definitely better and cheaper options.
That's a pretty big "if." What's better and cheaper, though? I mean, for $2700, your options that get you to 400mm are pretty small. Sigma, of course, but I'm not sure there's evidence (yet) to believe that's an optically superior option. The 300mm f/4 + teleconverter is cheaper but with no VR and no zoom you're hampered in flexibility - and the combo, while sharp, is not so unbelievable as to make me assume it has to be substantially better than this. You can't sneak into the 300mm f/2.8 for this price range to get VR.
I suppose you could look into older, manual focus 500mm lenses, but that sure gives up a lot of flexibility. They're great, don't get me wrong, but it's not really the same ballgame.
I'm not trying to argue, just trying to figure out what you had in mind?