Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DaveKoontz" data-source="post: 4634" data-attributes="member: 315">Hi Mark, I had a lengthy response but the system logs me out if I don't make response short and sweet. I'll try again. The comparison between the 70-200 mm and the 28-300 mm was/is based on physical attributes ... the new lens is quite a bit shorter and has a barrel that extend four inches from the body when fully extended to 300mm.&nbsp; The weight is about the same, but again the size of the new lens seems to be more manageable. I do miss the tripod mounting capability on the 70/200 but can live with mounting the camera itself on the tripod. Sharpness is comparable, both lenses are tack sharp. This was a worry to me since the new lens was half the cost of the 70/200 when I bought it. The extra 100mm focal length will help me in that I can not always get close to my subject matter, the 200mm was good, the 300mm will be better and as sharp. More later - I don't want to be logged out again.Dave</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DaveKoontz, post: 4634, member: 315"] Hi Mark, I had a lengthy response but the system logs me out if I don't make response short and sweet. I'll try again. The comparison between the 70-200 mm and the 28-300 mm was/is based on physical attributes ... the new lens is quite a bit shorter and has a barrel that extend four inches from the body when fully extended to 300mm. The weight is about the same, but again the size of the new lens seems to be more manageable. I do miss the tripod mounting capability on the 70/200 but can live with mounting the camera itself on the tripod. Sharpness is comparable, both lenses are tack sharp. This was a worry to me since the new lens was half the cost of the 70/200 when I bought it. The extra 100mm focal length will help me in that I can not always get close to my subject matter, the 200mm was good, the 300mm will be better and as sharp. More later - I don't want to be logged out again. Dave [/QUOTE]

Verification