Other Nikon G lenses used on EOS that are not 14-24mm
gasrocks wrote:
And, how much of the cost of a Nikon 200-400 is for VR which you are not getting to use?
mawz wrote:
The 200-400 can be had in AI-S form with similar performance
I agree, I looked at that lens, but having f mounted bodies and reading the various reviews I opted for the newer version. No additional cost for the VR ideally I would use it on my Nikon D700 or Fujifilm but some days I only shoot Canon. At least I now have the option to use it on a Canon body.
mawz wrote:
Really only the 14-24 and 200/2 are worth bothering with the hassle of G with adaptors.
Valorin wrote:
I think the reason not many G lenses are being used with the adapter on Canons is that only the 14-24 is exceptional enough to warrant it. Also, stop-down metering on a zoom lens is less than desirable when fully compatible alternatives exist. For landscape it\'s tolerable, but I\'d be tearing my hair out for just about anything else. I can\'t begin to imagine how frustrating it would be to use the 200-400VR on a tripod and having to rotate the camera to set the aperture.
In the end your comments are true and valid, but I\'m curious if other G adapter users have other G lenses and have tried it out. And of course why not, as you have pointed out. Most will likely just mount it on the 14-24 and be done with it, as you all pointed out there are equivalent and better alternatives, but if one has other G lens why not try it.
A hassle and frustrating absolutely.
Isn\'t that what alternative lenses are all about. Trying out all the options.
mawz wrote:
Note there\'s a few other FF G lenses, the 28-80, 28-100 and 70-300VR.
Thanks I\'ll add that to my list above.
Dec 28, 2008 at 01:20 PM
Previous versions of burningheart's message #6531264 « Other Nikon G lenses used on EOS that are not 14-24mm »
