Thom article and the 200-400mm

Started May 20, 2008 | Discussions thread
Anastigmat Forum Pro • Posts: 12,664
Re: Thom article and the 200-400mm

Mike Neary wrote:

Anastigmat wrote:

For $5K, it better be a good lens. This is a Nikon lens forum, but
it is hard not to bring up a semi-comparable Canon lens, the
100-400mm f4.5-5.6 L. Not as fast as the Nikkor for sure, but
perhaps just as good optically and a bit wider at the wide end, for a
fraction of the price. If Nikon makes a lens comparable in sharpness
and price to the Canon 100-400L, it would be wildly popular.

The Canon 100-400 is not in the same class as the Nikon 200-400. And
Nikon does make a lens comparable in sharpness, aperture, and focal
range to the Canon: the 80-400 VR.



According to somebody named Thom Hogan, the Nikon 80-400mm VR is not very usable at 400mm. Too much AF hunting and too much loss of image quality above 300mm.

Of course what Thom Hogan thinks about the 200-400mm is the subject of this thread.

Below is a review of the Canon.

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