200-400VR, I don't get this lens

Started Mar 2, 2010 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Michael Fink
Junior MemberPosts: 48
Like?
200-400VR, I don't get this lens
Mar 2, 2010

Of all the lenses that Nikon makes, I think the 200-400VR is the one lens that I don't really understand it's positioning/pricing. It's not that fast (F4), it doesn't take TCs that well, and it's just not (IMHO, this is ALL IMHO) all that useful a zoom range. It's also heavy (not easily hand holdable) and expensive. If it was a 2-3K lens, it might make more sense (I still wouldn't want it though). If it was a F2.8 that took TCs well, then I'd own it in a heartbeat, it would be a great compromise between something like the Sigma 300-800 (Giving a 400-800 5.6 with the 2X TC).

What am I missing here? I've never used this lens extensively (I have had it mounted and taken a few snaps), so it's very possible I'm missing something. And I've found it's quality to be very good. I just think, for my money, that I'd prefer a 80-400 and a 300F2.8 instead of the 200-400 (for just a little more money).

I'm just surprised that Nikon actually makes a lens that I can't really think of a "reason" to fit into my camera bag. It seems like a very niche product, no? (And I'd love to have a 200MM F2, another really niche lens).

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow