Thom Hogan's assessment of a D400

Started Apr 8, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP jfriend00 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,443
Re: Will you buy if Nikon went crazy high ISO & not MP?

whoosh1 wrote:

jfriend00 wrote:

If Nikon had a 200-400 f/2.8, I'd rather have it instead of f/4 (even though it would be quite heavy).

Yep - that's the crux of the problem - it becomes too heavy including for a 200-400 f/4 itself (though for reasonably fixed location like soccer or most other sports that should less of a problem - as compared to hiking  and suddenly seeing a deer or an elk where you don't have time to set up a tripod).

No large aperture long glass is appropriate for hiking long distances or hand holding for long periods of time.   Never has been.  I had no idea that's what you were talking about.  If you want a multi-purpose lighter weight zoom (like the 80-400), then by all means get one.  Each lens comes with a set of tradeoffs (weight, size, cost, aperture, zoom range, optical performance, etc...) and one needs to judge which tradeoffs are right for your situation.

I don't however believe that better high ISO performance means that nobody wants larger aperture long glass which is what I thought I was discussing here.  It still has its place too.

-- 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