Sigh. You want me to be quiet? The truth doesn't agree with your point of view? Last time I looked I am free to put across my point of view. I did not tell *you* to be quiet, just that there is no point in voicing your criticism as the lens is already made and no amount of whining about it will change that. But one has to ask, what do you think you will accomplish by criticizing Nikon for not making a retracing 70-200 f2.8? Is Nikon going to redesign it and make a retracting version as well? Scrap the current version and make a retracting version? No, so it is a pointless exercise.
Also, accusing me of being a fanboy in order to halt logical discussion. Sad, very sad. Don't label people names just because your argument doesn't stack up, argue the point, not call names to stifle discussion. The saying is, "play the ball not the person".
As for me doing a test to show the differences between the 70-200 f2.8 E FL VR and the new 70-200 f2.8S, I would think people would be interested regardless of the result. If I am such a "fanboy" as you want to think then I would have said the new 70-200 f2.8S was much better and everyone should buy one, but I didn't so, there goes your fanboy theory. The point you're missing is that the native Z mount lens has advantages one of which is no need for the FTZ, but it is still a better lens and a better lens using the TC's.
Now, from what I know, the new Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 can't take TC's. So, how does that bode for that want this feature? So, there are two strikes against the Canon RF mount, a potential dust pump and it can't take TC's. I would rather have the lens that Nikon has given us: Sharper, takes TC's and is not a potential dust pump.
I think the best thing for you would be to buy into the Canon ML system as they appear to have what you want. Don't need to worry about posting here criticizing Nikon as you can go with Canon and their fabulous retracting 70-200 f2.8!
Sigh. You want me to be quiet? The truth doesn't agree with your point of view? Last time I looked I am free to put across my point of view. I did not tell *you* to be quiet, just that there is no point in voicing your criticism as the lens is already made and no amount of whining about it will change that. But one has to ask, what do you think you will accomplish by criticizing Nikon for not making a retracing 70-200 f2.8? But one has to ask, what do you think you will accomplish by criticizing Nikon for not making a retracing 70-200 f2.8? Is Nikon going to redesign it and make a retracting version as well? Scrap the current version and make a retracting version? No, so it is a pointless exercise.
Also, accusing me of being a fanboy in order to halt logical discussion. Sad, very sad. Don't label people names just because your argument doesn't stack up, argue the point, not call names to stifle discussion. The saying is, "play the ball not the person".
As for me doing a test to show the differences between the 70-200 f2.8 E FL VR and the new 70-200 f2.8S, I would think people would be interested regardless of the result. If I am such a "fanboy" as you want to think then I would have said the new 70-200 f2.8S was better and everyone should buy one, but I didn't so, there goes your fanboy theory. The point you're missing is that the native Z mount lens has advantages one of which is no need for the FTZ, but it is still a better lens and a better lens using the TC's.
Now, from what I know, the new Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 can't take TC's. So, how does that bode for that want this feature? So, there are two strikes against the Canon RF mount, a potential dust pump and it can't take TC's. I would rather have the lens that Nikon has given us: Sharper, takes TC's and is not a potential dust pump.
I think the best thing for you would be to buy into the Canon ML system as they appear to have what you want. Don't need to worry about posting here criticizing Nikon as you can go with Canon and their fabulous retracting 70-200 f2.8!
Sigh. You want me to be quiet? The truth doesn't agree with your point of view? Last time I looked I am free to put across my point of view. I did not tell *you* to be quiet, just that there is no point in voicing your criticism as the lens is already made and no amount of whining about it will change that. Also, accusing me of being a fanboy in order to halt logical discussion. Sad, very sad. Don't label people names just because your argument doesn't stack up, argue the point, not call names to stifle discussion. The saying is, "play the ball not the person".
As for me doing a test to show the differences between the 70-200 f2.8 E FL VR and the new 70-200 f2.8S, I would think people would be interested. If I am such a "fanboy" as you want to think then I would have said the new 70-200 f2.8S was better and everyone should buy one, but I didn't also, there goes your fanboy theory. The point you're missing is that the native Z mount lens has advantages one of which is no need for the FTZ, but it is still a better lens and a better lens using the TC's.
Now, from what I know, the new Canon 70-200 f2.8 can't take TC's. So, how does that bode for that want this feature?
I think the best thing for you would be to buy into the Canon ML system as they appear to have what you want. Don't need to worry about posting here criticizing Nikon as you can go with Canon and their fabulous retracting 70-200 f2.8!
