Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Danno_RIP" data-source="post: 776345" data-attributes="member: 34269">I wondered about that lens.&nbsp; I have 14-30 f4 Z S, but I did upgrade to the 24-70 f2.8 and splurged on the 70-200 f2.8.&nbsp; Originally I considered the 24-200 when they were talking about it, but I buckled down and saved some money and off loaded my Tamron to KEH which all though not as profitable far less painful than a sale elsewhere. I cannot manage the stress selling things.That 100-400 looks appealing, and it is lighter than my 200-500 f5.6, but I cannot bring myself to even saving for the lens.&nbsp; It is just too much cash.&nbsp; I just do not do enough bird or wildlife photos anymore.&nbsp; The lighter rig may change that, but it would take a bit to change my mind on it.&nbsp; I am kind of waiting to see what Nikon does now that the Z9 is out maybe a Z8 or a ZXIII.&nbsp; Who knows.&nbsp; But for now I am in good shape.I am curious if you kept the lens and if you like it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Danno_RIP, post: 776345, member: 34269"] I wondered about that lens. I have 14-30 f4 Z S, but I did upgrade to the 24-70 f2.8 and splurged on the 70-200 f2.8. Originally I considered the 24-200 when they were talking about it, but I buckled down and saved some money and off loaded my Tamron to KEH which all though not as profitable far less painful than a sale elsewhere. I cannot manage the stress selling things. That 100-400 looks appealing, and it is lighter than my 200-500 f5.6, but I cannot bring myself to even saving for the lens. It is just too much cash. I just do not do enough bird or wildlife photos anymore. The lighter rig may change that, but it would take a bit to change my mind on it. I am kind of waiting to see what Nikon does now that the Z9 is out maybe a Z8 or a ZXIII. Who knows. But for now I am in good shape. I am curious if you kept the lens and if you like it. [/QUOTE]

Verification