Nikon travel lenses
Nikon travel lenses
May 16, 2012
We're taking a big family trip to Alaska soon and will head inland. Have many traveled with the Nikon 70 - 200/2.8? It seems to be a beast! I've heard of a better strap to support it around your shoulder but the lens is still huge. I'm thinking of purchasing the 28-300/3.5 but don't want to be wasteful and purchase things I don't need. I guess the corollary is, is there a big difference in image quality between the Nikon 28-300/3.5 versus the 70-200/2.8 and 24-70/2.8 to justify bringing one lens rather than two, one of which is huge. If traveling with the beast is doable, the less expensive option to purchasing a new lens is to get a teleconverter. Thanks.
Have many traveled with the Nikon 70 - 200/2.8? It seems to be a beast! I've heard of a better strap to support it around your shoulder but the lens is still huge.
This is just an alternative suggestion, I recently was fortunate enough to win a Cotton Carrier Vest at a local Trade Show. Originally I was not overly impressed with it, but when I used it and watched the videos on it I am a convert.
If you watch the video about 1:15 into it they are using a D700 c/w the MB-10 grip and a Nikon 70 - 200/2.8 lens. I have also used the exact same combo and it worked well.
I am not suggesting this is the answe, just an alternative.
Remember, it's not the CPU that's in your camera that makes great images, it's the one located about 4" behind the viewfinder that does.
Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise.
Thanks! That looks interesting. Do you know anything about the lens mount for the 70-200? Does the lens always need the support of a tripod/monopod? I'm afraid that heavy lens would break the f-mount.