Why no affordable 400mm from nikon?

Started Apr 30, 2010 | Discussions thread
Redteg94 Senior Member • Posts: 1,546
Re: Because there is no business case for a 400 5.6

Well the 80-400 is hardly an example of superior AF tech, lol. That thing is ridiculously slow and nervy in any situation. It was apparently designed before Nikon got a handle on AF. Look at the much newer 70-300VR though: that lens focuses pretty decently indeed and is an f/5.6 lens. I believe the lens/AF motor design has a larger influence on AF performance than maximum aperture. The fact that Nikon doesn't make any high-end f/5.6 teles makes it hard to prove to a Nikon user, but the 70-300VR at least makes a case for it. Trying out the 400/5.6L, 100-400L or if you're really lucky, the 800L should illustrate that well.

Monkii wrote:

I see, I ain't Canon shooter, just comment from what would happen with the 80-400VR.

Guess the OP now has enough reasons to move to Canon XD

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