Chestnut Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
p.3 #6 · 200VR... fit in a kit with a 300VR? | |
Zachs wrote:
you already have 200@2.8...1/3 stop difference is NOTHING. Especially when the 70-200 shines wide open. Poor investment in my opinion.
I would have to disagree here.
(I know you know that 2.8 -> 2.0 is 1-stop)
But on FX, I'm not so sure the 70-200 VR really "shines" that well at 200, esp when compared to the 200f2. I have both, and love them both for what they are. If you're talking IQ, the 200 f/2 is better in any and every way than the 70-200 at 200, anywhere, anytime, any place, and not just by a margin.
Of course, the 70-200 will give good results, and is more versatile. But if ultimate IQ is what the OP is after, the 200f2 cannot be beat at 200mm. Moreover, the 200f2 seems to LOVE TC's. I've used 1.4x and 2.0x on mine, and have not noticed much degradation at all (marginal, but IQ is still jaw dropping). I have not compared the 200f2+2.0x to the 400f2.8 at f/4, and I'm sure the 400 will win in every aspect other than weight and dimension, but I would not be surprised to find differences that make or break a shot (like it could between the 70-200 and the 200f2).
Of course, again, that's just my opinion.
|