Nikon 200-500 still has to show what it can do but promises are there, many will pay the premium to have a Nikon.
Tamron and Sigma C remain valid alternatives, I expect the Nikon to be sharper, but will it be significant?
My current question is more on:
80-400: lighter, more versatile, optically less ( see MTF) but more expensive?
200-400: 5 times the price for 1 stop and a bit of scharpness?
Where did Nikon place this in their own line? Just seems a 150-600 competitor?
Btw I believe it will outperform a sigma 500mm f4.5 so it is officially on my wishlist
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk