Mach Schnell wrote:
Nikon has a new 24-70 f/2.8 zoom but it is quite pricey. There is
also an older 28-70 f/2.8 zoom which would be more affordable. A
third option would be the 28-105 f/3.5-4.5 zoom. This one is no
longer made but there are plenty of them around. I've had one since
the film days and think quite highly of it. There is also a 24-85
Thanks. I know about the 24-70mm but I can't justify it because I use that range so little. The 28-70mm is probably a little too heavy but I'll look into the 28-105mm and the 25-85mm lenses.
Most folks shy away from the 2x due to quality and light loss. The
1.4x is very good, and the 1.7x almost as good. These only work on
the longer zooms and primes. Autofocus works fine in bright light,
okay in medium light, and will struggle in low light situations with
The 2x on Canon is quite good (when using on primes) but I'm aware of the comprises, regarding light loss and quality. I was more interested in finding out whether I'd still be able to use auto-focus on the 600mm at f/8, which is what it would be if I had the 2x converter on. Obviously I'd expect it to not be as good as without the converter.
If the 1.7x converter is almost as good as the 1.4x though then I might sacrifice a little reach for quality.
Nikon does not disclose future lens plans. Many people long for a
70-200 f/4 VR - especially those coming over from the Canon camp.
I guess I was just fishing a little. I might just sit tight on the 70-200mm and I'll only get one if I absolutely need it.
-- hide signature --
|Fangorn Forest by cand1d|
|Yosemite Falls with Moonbow by Jonathan Shapiro|
from Best Landscape of the Week 4