p.1 #1 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
Hello all. I just upgraded from a d7000 to a d800e and I am loving it. I find however when I am using my old 70-300 I am not loving the quality of the image as much as I used to. When I compare it to the 85 1.8 G it obviously pales in comparison.
My primary interest is landscapes and I would love to find something light weight that I can take backpacking with me. I was wondering if there wasn't something like a 180 f4 with very good optics and I am having trouble locating something like that. I could make due with third party or even manual focus or a zoom as long as it was optically an improvement on the 70-300 and preferably lighter weight. I don't have a teleconverter but I could get one if it would work with the 85 and whatever other lens I get to give me a wider range of options.
p.1 #7 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
There are very few Nikon mount options near 200mm that are sharp enough to satisfy the D800(e) and are light weight.
The 200/4 AIS used to be my 200mm telephoto option, but it ran out of gas at 36MP and even was just OK at 12MP wide open.
The 180/2.8D is too heavy (the AIS version is optically better, but much heavier) and not very compact.
My personally choice is a 180/4 APO Voigtlander, but those are very expensive and hard to find.
p.1 #9 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
Thanks for the info and advice. I was unaware of the Voigtlander. It sounds like it might work but I looked on ebay and they are around $1400. It seems like there should be more options for people like me who are starting to really enjoy using primes. I guess I will stick with the 70-300 ( I have the VR version). Maybe think about trying out the 70-200/4 someday to see if the increase in quality is worth the extra cost weight and limited stretch. Thanks for the help Brian
p.1 #10 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
briancphoto wrote:
Thanks for the info and advice. I was unaware of the Voigtlander. It sounds like it might work but I looked on ebay and they are around $1400. It seems like there should be more options for people like me who are starting to really enjoy using primes. I guess I will stick with the 70-300 ( I have the VR version). Maybe think about trying out the 70-200/4 someday to see if the increase in quality is worth the extra cost weight and limited stretch. Thanks for the help Brian
I'm currently hunting for a 180/4 Voigtlander in Nikon mount and they are very hard to find, but they do come up now and again.
p.1 #12 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
briancphoto wrote:
Maybe think about trying out the 70-200/4 someday to see if the increase in quality is worth the extra cost weight and limited stretch.
While the 70-300VR is no slouch, the 70-200/4 VR is much, much sharper with significantly better IS and faster AF.
p.1 #16 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
The Sigma is sharp but itīs not exactly lightweight.
My advise is to pick up a Nikon AF 180 f2.8D.
Unlike the big and clunky zooms that have most of the weight in parts extending out or in the front of the lens, the 180 f2.8 feels as if you have a 50mm prime lens mounted on your camera. Itīs really well balanced. I used one on a D300 body (without grip).
Optical quality is excellent. Better then any zoom lens.
p.1 #18 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
I just got the 70-200/4 to replace my wife's 70-300 VR. The 70-200 is ridiculously better in my opinion, and we're very happy with it. It's only a little bit bigger, and it is way sharper -- although maybe we had a bad copy of the 70-300 VR.
p.1 #19 · lightweight telephoto to replace 70-300 g
OccAeon wrote:
I just got the 70-200/4 to replace my wife's 70-300 VR. The 70-200 is ridiculously better in my opinion, and we're very happy with it. It's only a little bit bigger, and it is way sharper -- although maybe we had a bad copy of the 70-300 VR.
Yeah, just picked that lens up. Auto-focus is amazingly snappy. VR is amazing. Joy to use. (besides being sharp)
