Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mycenius" data-source="post: 165454" data-attributes="member: 14714">[PLAIN]Re: 70-200mm, 80-200mm, &amp; 70-300mm [Re: Hello From Kiwi Land!][/PLAIN]Right. One of the factors I'm considering is weight versus performance - if I eventually get a 70-200 or 70-300 I will be wanting to be able to carry it (along with a tripod) with me on day treks &amp; bush walks and such like - so it's also about the trade off of how much sharpness &amp; speed you gain with the more pro oriented 70-200 or 80-200 (f/2.8 or f/4) zooms versus the lighter weight of the pro-sumer 70-300 designs (either the Nikon or Tokina, I know many people consider the Sigma 70-300 a bit inferior to the first two so not considering that in my musings - the Tokina 70-300 looks to be a very cost effective solution, while the Nikon 70-300 is the lightest of all 5 lenses I've mentioned).Cool - will do.<img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mycenius, post: 165454, member: 14714"] [b][PLAIN]Re: 70-200mm, 80-200mm, & 70-300mm [Re: Hello From Kiwi Land!][/PLAIN][/b] Right. One of the factors I'm considering is weight versus performance - if I eventually get a 70-200 or 70-300 I will be wanting to be able to carry it (along with a tripod) with me on day treks & bush walks and such like - so it's also about the trade off of how much sharpness & speed you gain with the more pro oriented 70-200 or 80-200 (f/2.8 or f/4) zooms versus the lighter weight of the pro-sumer 70-300 designs (either the Nikon or Tokina, I know many people consider the Sigma 70-300 a bit inferior to the first two so not considering that in my musings - the Tokina 70-300 looks to be a very cost effective solution, while the Nikon 70-300 is the lightest of all 5 lenses I've mentioned).Cool - will do.:) [/QUOTE]

Verification