F4 is not F2.8...some thoughts

Started Oct 26, 2012 | Discussions thread
Guidenet
Guidenet Forum Pro • Posts: 15,748
Re: F4 is not F2.8...some thoughts

Shotcents wrote:

I know quite a few people who make money with their gear and few own F4 stuff. The MKII and VRII/VRI are what I typically see. I do admit I've seen the 16-35mm F4 in my friends bags of late. Everyone seems to love that lens as much as the 14-24.

I think this lens, along with the 24-120 F4 are WAY overpriced, though I do feel that making a buyer pay extra for the tripod foot is the biggest issue I have.

For starters, the 16-35 f/4 is one of my favorite event lenses I use for many scenarios at work. It's a wonderful lens and you'll be happy with it, I believe.

One thing, Robert, although I don't like the idea of Nikon charging extra, especially that much extra, for a tripod collar, it will stimulate the production of third party collars. Maybe the buyers will vote with their wallet, never buying the Nikon variety, showing their displeasure with this idea. Just because Canon does it, doesn't mean Nikon should. I also believe that every lens should come with a hood, something Nikon rarely leaves off but Canon does more often.

If and when Really Right Stuff and Kirk make collars for this lens, I would think they'd be better than the Nikon collar and maybe for less money. I'd much prefer those brands if I were remotely considering the 70-200 f/4, which I'm not.

Have a wonderful weekend, my friend.

-- hide signature --

Cheers, Craig
Follow me on Twitter @craighardingsr : Equipment in Profile

 Guidenet's gear list:Guidenet's gear list
Canon PowerShot G1 X Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D800 +31 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
glo
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow