Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Epoc" data-source="post: 126158" data-attributes="member: 12902"><p>Yeah fair enough, but just for arguments sake, it's only 155g heavier than the 70-300, 3mm larger in diameter and is actually 11mm shorter with no hood, when the 70-300 is zoomed out. Personally, I'd def take it for travel if I was going on a dedicated photo holiday along with a 70-200/2.8, a 35/1.8, a 50/1.8 and a UWA like a 16-35. For just a holiday lens, I wouldn't take a 17-50 and a 70-300. That would be too much. I'd take a super zoom like a 18-270 and 35/1.8 for low light. Covers pretty well all bases, light and not too much lens changing. But that's just my opinion and what I've done in the past. I guess everyone's different <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>