Do you still prefer a D70 over a hacked 300D?

Started Jun 9, 2004 | Discussions thread
(unknown member) Veteran Member • Posts: 9,762
Ahh ok...

I see so it's not that the 80 - 400 doesn't compare (because it does) it's that it doesn't exactly fit your needs! Have you tried the 80 - 400 on the D70? There are people here that are using it and they like it (not many complain it's too slow but they certainly aren't preaching about its speed either).

Tailz wrote:

Pete Perry wrote:

Yes but if you put that 80 - 400 on a D1h or D2h and the focusing
is fast! Not only that but I've had older Nikon lenses without AFS
beat newer Canon lens equivalents with USM in focusing speed (70 -
300 ED D easily beats the 75 - 300 USM IS). I don't know if that
is the case here but I do know that the USM is really limited
because the better Nikon body you have the better the focusing you
have anyway!

I don't want to spend the cash on cameras like the D2h just because
they focus faster on non-AFS cameras. It's just a hobby for me.

Nikon has older TC's that should work with the 80 - 400 VR just
because you can't use the TC-14E isn't a reason to dismiss it!

I don't want duplicate TC's, one for lenses without AF-S and
another for lenses with AF-S. That's just crazy. And I don't want
Sigma or Kenko TC's, and I don't want to modify my Nikon TC's with
a grinder so that they work on both systems.

The 80-400 just doesn't fit into the Nikon AF-S line-up. Which
means that there is a big gap in the Nikon lens line-up.

The 100 - 400 L has tripod sensing and shuts the IS off when it
detects a tripod so it doesn't work on a tripod either! Seems to
me that if you can't see that you put the lens on a tripod maybe
you replace your camera with a walking stick.

Most easily transportable tripods are not that stable and need VR
to get good images. Not my opinion, read what people like Ken
Rockwell and others have to say about that. I just agree with
them.

Tailz wrote:
even Nikon's own TC-14E doesn't work with the 80-400 because it
doesn't have AF-S and it is the slowest focusing lens in the Nikon
line-up.

And the VR doesn't work on a tripod.

I don't regard them as competitive.

A revised 80-400 VR with new VR (like the 200-400) and AF-S, for
the same price as the Canon, now that I would look at.

Pete Perry wrote:
I can show you pictures that prove the 80 - 400 is in fact in the
same class and may even be better! The price is comparable as well
so it looks to me like they're competing lenses.

Tailz wrote:

Just so that I can buy the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM lens.

Nikon has nothing like it in that price range, and I want it for
wildlife and bird photography.

Don't even mention the 80-400 VR, it's not in the same class.

I may even buy a cheap 300D body just for this purpose. I'll keep
the D70 for WA, macro and flash photography. IF I can get the BF
fixed - been back to Nikon 3 times now, I'm starting to find out
where I can get a 2mm Allen key.

-- hide signature --

'The probability that we may fall in the struggle ought not to deter us from the support of a cause we believe to be just; it shall not deter me.' -- Abraham Lincoln

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