LOL.... Well you saw some of my knife collection
It will not mean a lot to you guys over there but to the British members if i say she is from Yorkshire they will understand.
LOL.... Well you saw some of my knife collection
Looks to have good detail
That is one big lens! So is it longer and/or fatter than the Tamron? I know you said it was heavier--which I guess might be why the Tamron doesn't require a tripod collar. Congratulations, Pete!
Looks very good. You shooting in auto ISO?
I didn't get to shoot the Tamzooka too long, maybe an hour but from what I remember this is a tiny bit larger. The weight is not that much different.
Tammy 4.3 lbs nikon 4.6 lbs
I got it to more than that
Tam 1951g = 4.3lbs
Nikon 2300g = 5.07lbs
I I took the specs off B$H website. It could be wrong. Sorry if I misled anyone.
I I took the specs off B$H website. It could be wrong. Sorry if I misled anyone.
I just checked B&H's web site. The weight you listed is what they have, but the Nikon web site lists it as Mike said. I'm wondering if the difference is due to the tripod collar? Maybe? :indecisiveness:
I just checked B&H's web site. The weight you listed is what they have, but the Nikon web site lists it as Mike said. I'm wondering if the difference is due to the tripod collar? Maybe? :indecisiveness:
EDIT: Amazon also lists it as 4.6 pounds.
Nice Pete detail looks great
I'll let you give it a go next week. We'll have @Don Kuykendall there as well. 3 of us should be able to hold it up and track some birds.