p.139 #1 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
cputeq wrote:
So I'm enjoying the fruits of all y'alls' labor, viewing these photos
I've been looking at this and the Sigma 150-600 (C or S) for a while -- Wondering if anyone here considered that lens (or used it) and why they decided on the Nikon?
My first hunch is that comfort with shooting first-party is pretty good...but I read the 200-500 is a bit slower AF than the Sigma (for things like BIF).
Hard to find a head-to-head with regards to AF-C on these. I swear I'm going to start a kickstarter and build an AF-C facility.
I started with the Tamron 150-600 v1 and didn't liked it at all (IQ just soft beyond 60ft or so and slow AF) I than changed to the Sigma 150-600 Sports and the Sigma was just a bit too heavy for my liking. The 200-500 is a contant aperture lens and the Sigma is a variable one and just a bit slower. AF/IQ wise there was not much difference. The Sigma has an advance on reach.
p.139 #6 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
The 200-500 has fast and accurate AF. It maybe locks on a tad more slowly than my f/4 500, but tracking is about the same. I love the pocket rocket for travel and photojournalism work.
p.139 #8 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
gvg45 wrote:
Very nice -- probably the best photo I've ever seen of these ugly SOBs (I dunno why I don't like them--I guess they kinda remind me of vulture or condors...just in water all the time ).
p.139 #18 · Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR
walts.photo wrote:
Wow!
Howard, I'm amazed you go so close, using 200mm FL.
In a hide with glass window, the hide is also blacked out on the inside so the bird can only see its reflection.
Shots are through glass, but the glass controls the photographer, no waving lenses poking out, and the birds are undisturbed, way to go.
(I dunno why I don't like them--I guess they kinda remind me of vulture or condors...just in water all the time 
