Thom article and the 200-400mm

Started May 20, 2008 | Discussions thread
VRII Senior Member • Posts: 2,529
Re: Thom article and the 200-400mm

The 200-400mm VR is an awesome piece of glass, I do not own one, but have use my friends version extensively. The big, and I mean big problem for me is that it is not practical, it is a monster to carry around and I find I can cover the same range with my 300mm F/4 AF-S, simply by taking a few steps back or forth on a horizontal subject. On a vertical subject, ( Birds on a tree, on flight,) where I can not walk a few steps to make up for the zoom, I simply add a TC-17 E II converter and I'm set, I hardly ever need less than 420mm. Granted I give up 1 F/stop, VR and subject isolation, but if I really need to upgrade I would be more inclined to get the 300mm F/2.8 VR, that will give me 400mm F/4 AF-S, VR and a 1F/stop advantage when shooting at 300mm.

Again nothing wrong with the 200-400mm F/4 vr but I think the size of it, is not practical unless you have a specialized niche in which you are constantly zooming with in this range, say you specialize in sporting events, such as hockey or basketball where you need to quickly zoom back and forth.

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