Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rorie" data-source="post: 384893" data-attributes="member: 15398">Thanks for all the comments.I guess when i am talking about speed, it is more the aperture rather than the focus speed.&nbsp; I agree that the 70-300 is good, but, i find if i am zoomed in at 300mm, with the aperture being 5.6, my shutter needs to be open way too long to get a sharp photo of an animal which rarely stand still!&nbsp; Hence i was hoping to get something faster, but perhaps have to drop down to a 200mm focal length?I keep forgetting about the DX/FX crop factor, so good point there!And RE teleconverters, i did think about that, but as discussed, i may get more reach, but its the one stop down that brings the problem.This IS going to be a holiday of a lifetime, so i am wondering if it is worth forking out a bit to get some great photos (i hope!).&nbsp; The sigma 150-600 still has a high aperture at 6.3 which may not help me much, but perhaps the 70-200 2.8 could be a contender?Any other thoughts?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rorie, post: 384893, member: 15398"] Thanks for all the comments. I guess when i am talking about speed, it is more the aperture rather than the focus speed. I agree that the 70-300 is good, but, i find if i am zoomed in at 300mm, with the aperture being 5.6, my shutter needs to be open way too long to get a sharp photo of an animal which rarely stand still! Hence i was hoping to get something faster, but perhaps have to drop down to a 200mm focal length? I keep forgetting about the DX/FX crop factor, so good point there! And RE teleconverters, i did think about that, but as discussed, i may get more reach, but its the one stop down that brings the problem. This IS going to be a holiday of a lifetime, so i am wondering if it is worth forking out a bit to get some great photos (i hope!). The sigma 150-600 still has a high aperture at 6.3 which may not help me much, but perhaps the 70-200 2.8 could be a contender? Any other thoughts? [/QUOTE]

Verification