OccAeon Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Lauchlan Toal wrote:
Impossible to say without having tried the lens, or even having read many reviews, but I'd guess that the bare 200-500 would be better. Bare lenses usually do better than lenses with teleconverters, and the 1.7x tc is an older design that's not as good as the version 3 designs for the 1.4 and 2x tcs. On the other hand, the 300mm would be a tiny bit faster, and stopping down to f5.6 might even things up a bit. Overall, I think the two lenses would be fairly close, but I'd expect the 200-500 to edge out the 300mm by a slight margin....Show more →
Stopping down? Are you thinking of the 300 f/2.8? I thought the OP meant the 300 PF, but maybe I'm wrong. It seems weird to compare the 300 f/2.8 with a much lower-priced lens.
I'd bet that the 200-500 is a tiny bit better than the 300 PF + TC 1.7, but that the difference isn't big. But I could be wrong.
|