OwlsEyes Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Just for the record, the Nikon 200-500mm f5.6VR is at least as sharp as the Canon 100-400mm f4.5-5.6IS (original recipe ). I owned and shot the original 100-400mm IS in tandem with the 300mm f2.8 IS mk1 for about 10 years. I replaced the lot w/ a Nikkor 200-400mm f4/VR which was better than my canon zoom but did not come close to the fixed 300mm f2.8.
Enter today, I now shoot the Nikon 200-500mm VR in tandem with the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AFS-II. In my opinion, the 200-500VR optically bests my former 200-400VR when shooting at a distance, but not when the subject is close... here the 200-400VR comes close to the optical performance of a 400mm f/2.8. Furthermore, 200-500VR is at least as good as my former 100-400mm IS (b4 current version). So, to say it is not as "good" as an L-zoom is not accurate. The lens is not built like an L-lens or premium Nikon optic and it does not focus as fast as current L-zooms and premium Nikkors, however... it is as sharp.
So what's the point... if Nikon can do this for $1400, so can Canon. Canon may have created an unreasonable expectation for price/performance by shooting for a 600mm f/5.6, but if they can produce this lens for $2100, they will sell a ton.
Edited on Oct 23, 2016 at 02:48 PM · View previous versions
|