Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Lens Question
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gfinlayson" data-source="post: 56307" data-attributes="member: 8768"><p><span style="font-size: 10px"><span style="color: #222222"><span style="font-family: 'Times'"><span style="font-family: 'arial'">The main issue I see with the 70-300 is that it's not a fast lens. Although it has VR, which will let you use low shutter speeds for static subjects, you'll struggle to get a fast enough shutter for moving subjects such as birds in flight in less than ideal lighting. The 80-200 with a 1.4TC (you'll need a Kenko Pro to retain AF on the screw drive 80-200) gives you a 280mm f/4. The 70-300 is f/5.6 at 300mm which is a full stop slower.Wide open isn't ideal with a TC on the 80-200, but it's perfectly useable, and at f/5.6 it improves somewhat. Bear in mind too that the 70-300 isn't that sharp at 300mm, and is best at about f/8.I've often thought of adding a 70-300 to my bag as a good walk-around telephoto due to it's relatively small size, but I'd never give up my 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S for it!My serious wildlife lens is the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX DG HSM, but that's in a whole different league and despite costing £2000 less than the Nikon, still required very in depth negotiations with Mrs. F!:couple_inlove:</span></span></span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gfinlayson, post: 56307, member: 8768"] [SIZE=2][COLOR=#222222][FONT=Times][FONT=arial]The main issue I see with the 70-300 is that it's not a fast lens. Although it has VR, which will let you use low shutter speeds for static subjects, you'll struggle to get a fast enough shutter for moving subjects such as birds in flight in less than ideal lighting. The 80-200 with a 1.4TC (you'll need a Kenko Pro to retain AF on the screw drive 80-200) gives you a 280mm f/4. The 70-300 is f/5.6 at 300mm which is a full stop slower.Wide open isn't ideal with a TC on the 80-200, but it's perfectly useable, and at f/5.6 it improves somewhat. Bear in mind too that the 70-300 isn't that sharp at 300mm, and is best at about f/8.I've often thought of adding a 70-300 to my bag as a good walk-around telephoto due to it's relatively small size, but I'd never give up my 80-200 f/2.8 AF-S for it!My serious wildlife lens is the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 EX DG HSM, but that's in a whole different league and despite costing £2000 less than the Nikon, still required very in depth negotiations with Mrs. F!:couple_inlove:[/FONT][/FONT][/COLOR][/SIZE] [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
Lens Question
Top