300mm new vs. 300mm old

Started Oct 14, 2011 | Discussions thread
Bilgy_no1 Veteran Member • Posts: 4,880
Re: Did comparison just a few days ago...

Very good point. I do manage to get some good shots with the manual lens, but AF is definitely a pro.

That's the reason why I might consider getting a D7000 someday to go with this 300mm lens. Should be an excellent combo.

tjuster1 wrote:

To me, the biggest disadvantage of legacy super-telephotos is focusing them. On a tripod, with a stationary subject, you can do it and get some wonderfully sharp images with good glass. But if the subject is moving at all it's much too difficult for me.

And if you're not on a tripod, forget about it.

I've had several long legacy telephotos (200mm, 300mm) and the reason 95% of the images I took with them were crap was because they were out of focus. The keeper rate just wasn't good enough for me to justify keeping them. I've since decided that if I'm going to go for a long telephoto I'll pick a native AF lens, even if it's slower and 'softer' than the old legacy options.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow