Art_P
Forum Pro
I blame the 50-200, it got me thinking I needed more than just the 300/4
but it was out of my price range.
OK, maybe the 40-150/2.8? Bid on several, didn't win any.
But while it would kind of fill the gap below 300mm, and be bright and sharp, would it really be what I needed?
Went to shoot fall foliage w my 12-200, would up shooting warblers (w digital 2x) realized I the 100-400 might be a better choice? MkII sounds better on paper, but bargains are not to be found. so started trolling for a MkI
Finally pulled the trigger, at about $715 after tax. Will report back when it arrives and I've gotten to try it out in the field.
but it was out of my price range.
OK, maybe the 40-150/2.8? Bid on several, didn't win any.
But while it would kind of fill the gap below 300mm, and be bright and sharp, would it really be what I needed?
Went to shoot fall foliage w my 12-200, would up shooting warblers (w digital 2x) realized I the 100-400 might be a better choice? MkII sounds better on paper, but bargains are not to be found. so started trolling for a MkI
Finally pulled the trigger, at about $715 after tax. Will report back when it arrives and I've gotten to try it out in the field.
