« on: March 05, 2014, 04:05:00 PM »
500mm would also give you slightly faster AF for BIF.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
There are reports elsewhere that AF for BIF is problematic. Does anyone have experience of this?
There are also rumours that stocks to the big retailers are being withheld while Tamron sorts out the AF problem. Has anyone any knowledge of this?
This is the same site that confidently claimed that the older 70-200/2.8 IS was sharper than the latest 70-200 Mark 2. I would treat their opinions and testresults with extreme caution...
Too bad the tamarin review did not compare this lens
The single biggest thing that I am anxious to see from Roger is what I simply cannot test: sample variation/consistency. That's a big deal, considering it is clear that there is a pretty broad sample variation with the 100-400L.
If you could consistently get as good or better results that the 100-400L at a lower price with better stabilization and reach, that's a big deal.
Not so good at 600mm wide open, but it gets a lot better at f/8. Not much has been said yet about the 500mm area.