Congratulations Peter … Life is too short, try it while we can!
FYI, I emailed off a question to RRS about the foot replacement. Turns out to be the same as the 400mmII, 500II and 600II foot. So after paying for the lens you can save a few bucks and swap feet around (if you use aftermarket feet).
Thank you, Patrick.
I see that you are ahead of the game with the replacement foot.
I think the Jobu 500 II replacement foot should fit too, although I am hoping that the 4th Gen. Design's foot for 800L will clear the hood, and if so, then that would be my 1st choice.
RRS using the same foot for the 400mmII, 500mmII, and the 600mmII but each lens has a different diameter hood. I’ll wait and try an existing RRS foot and then have a look at what works and fits the best. NatureScape has a new foot also but don’t know the size comparison.
PetKal wrote:
Thank you, Patrick.
I see that you are ahead of the game with the replacement foot.
I think the Jobu 500 II replacement foot should fit too, although I am hoping that the 4th Gen. Design's foor for 800L will clear the hood, and if so, then that would be my 1st choice.
Now we are talking about foot replacement and still no sign of Roland ("Netexpress")...
Now I'm getting worried.
PetKal wrote:
I got a call from "my" camera store today. They said they were getting three 200-400Ls, two had been spoken for already, and they thought that I might have been interested in the remaining one. So I ordered it.
Now I have to go from one to another family member of mine, with a hat in my hand, begging for contributions towards the lens purchase cost.
I am also hoping that I will be able to sell my 200-400L evaluation report on line, as that would also help mitigate the $$ blow of the purchase.
Very happy and relieved that you succumbed Peter. Now I know that I'll get an authentic report on it soon. Then I'll decide whether I'll conjure up a premature birthday too.
Db, the chances that I'd recommend the lens to someone like you who owns the best, i.e., 500 II and 400 II, are very slim.
The 200-400 weight continues to bother me. In light of it, I can not even sell my 400 DO in order to offset the 200-400L cost, because weight and size wise, 200-400L is no substitute whatsoever for 400 DO, let alone for 100-400.
PetKal wrote:
I got a call from "my" camera store today. They said they were getting three 200-400Ls, two had been spoken for already, and they thought that I might have been interested in the remaining one. So I ordered it.
Now I have to go from one to another family member of mine, with a hat in my hand, begging for contributions towards the lens purchase cost.
I am also hoping that I will be able to sell my 200-400L evaluation report on line, as that would also help mitigate the $$ blow of the purchase.
Welcome to my wait. I was taking a picture of a grizzly with my 600 this last weekend and he kept coming too close. And then I had to move away from my car or move the car. Its clear that the zoom with f4 will be a big asset. I just hope the iq is worth the money. Good choice.
After only waiting a couple of hours from announcement to call the store, I am "within 20" on my camera store list. I am pessimistic that I will get one of the first.Hopefully the first 17 back out and there is 3.
PetKal wrote:
Aprreciate your vote of confidence, Stu.
I was told the end of May.....however, that promise was given, as well as received, with little conviction.
So maybe more like a couple of weeks... but it would be awesome to have it in about a week
Scott Stoness wrote:
Welcome to my wait. I was taking a picture of a grizzly with my 600 this last weekend and he kept coming too close. And then I had to move away from my car or move the car. Its clear that the zoom with f4 will be a big asset. I just hope the iq is worth the money. Good choice.
After only waiting a couple of hours from announcement to call the store, I am "within 20" on my camera store list. I am pessimistic that I will get one of the first.Hopefully the first 17 back out and there is 3. ...Show more →
Scott, the real scenario you have described points in the direction of possibly the only 200-400 salient feature, compared to other long lenses, where a technical justification becomes feasible in my books: it's a zoom, and a moderately fast one at that.
When it comes to IQ thru the range of 200mm to 560mm, from wide open onwards, I expect it to be very good. As far as AF responsiveness goes, that remains to be seen. At least in theory, it is possible that they might have done a bang on job there, with more emphasis of response stability, and less AF drive lurching. Now, that would be nice.
… Life is too short, try it while we can! 
