I have Nikon 80-400 f/4.5 to f/5.6 g lens with ed and vr ii. I mostly use it for bird photography. The heading is wrong it should be 70-200 instead of 80-200
I take landscape and architecture photography along with some travel and portrait.
There are a lot of good words I read on Internet about the new 70-200 f/2.8 lens. Some says it is an essential lens. As I also use 24-120 kit lens I felt the 70-200 is overlapping so did not spent on it.
Need suggestion is 70-200really makes difference over 80-400 for general travel cum landscape and portrait photography? Is this useful to have it when I already have 80-400? If yes then under what circumstances?
By the way I am using D750 and D500 bodies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I take landscape and architecture photography along with some travel and portrait.
There are a lot of good words I read on Internet about the new 70-200 f/2.8 lens. Some says it is an essential lens. As I also use 24-120 kit lens I felt the 70-200 is overlapping so did not spent on it.
Need suggestion is 70-200really makes difference over 80-400 for general travel cum landscape and portrait photography? Is this useful to have it when I already have 80-400? If yes then under what circumstances?
By the way I am using D750 and D500 bodies.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited: