Kerry Pierce Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
That 200-500 f/5.6 is a real curiosity. It looks nice in the photo. If it is as good as the 80-400, how could it be priced so low? If it isn't, why would someone buy it when the Tamron and Sigma options are out there? Even so, I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out for both price and performance. I'm still using the old 80-400 AFd, so I really should upgrade, one of these days.
The 24-70 doesn't excite me much. As others have mentioned, it will likely be very expensive. I already have the 35-70 f/2.8d, 28-70 and 24-70. Adding VR, better sharpness wide open, and even better flare control might make me a buyer. But, I'm pretty happy with the 24-70 as it is.
I just picked up the Tamron 15-30, so I have no need for the 24.
Kerry
|