Yes.I hope they bring Both 600 f6.3 and 200-600f 5.6L. Too much asking?
Upvote
0
Yes.I hope they bring Both 600 f6.3 and 200-600f 5.6L. Too much asking?
I hope they bring Both 600 f6.3 and 200-600f 5.6L. Too much asking?
Once again, this rumor must be true and I can prove it with a highly regarded scientific method.
I just purchased the 100-400 Mk ii + 1.4 extender.
I did and the age of fine glass does not matter to me, hell I'd buy a 135L today if I didn't have one already. Plus, there is nothing out there in it's class as of yet. Good of time as any.Good combo. I've had mine for 5 years and they are battle tested.
Wouldn't have bought them in 2020 though. Hope you got a good deal!
No one can answer this question without knowing the price of the thing.A question to the experts - how good an IQ can we expect from such a 5x zoom, or the 5.7x zoom the 70-400mm will be?
Hmm, should I continue to help pay for my kids college or start replacing my lens collection.
With wildlife photography, I want all the light I can get on the center. Signed me up for the 20600 F5.6.Not for the wallet or the back. A 107mm front element is significantly heavier and more expensive to produce than a 95mm element. I imagine a 200-600 f/5.6 would be at least $2k-$3k more expensive than a 200-600 f/6.3.
Not for the wallet or the back. A 107mm front element is significantly heavier and more expensive to produce than a 95mm element. I imagine a 200-600 f/5.6 would be at least $2k-$3k more expensive than a 200-600 f/6.3.
Wish this was a 200-600 f4-5.6L... that would be amazing.....
As long as they optimised the IQ for 500mm and sacrficed some IQ at 100mm, then I'd go for the 100-500mm. Sigma has made a pretty decent 60-600mm.Thinking 100-500 vs. 200-500, I guess the question is, when you're out and about with 500 how often are you so lucky as to be wishing to drop back to 100. I know it happens but I'd think 200-500 would still address 95% of my cases.
Jack
I would rather a 200-500 f/4.0 or f/5.6. But I'll settle with a 200-400 f/4.0 if my dream never comes true.
f4 hits the issue of the physics of what I can carry and shoot hand held. I wonder how many of the 200-400mm f/4+1.4xTCs Canon has sold?That lens exists today minus 100mm in length @ $11k retail (I paid $7,500 Canon refurb), weights 8lb and is large. They should be able to get a 200-500 f5.6 if you look at the Nikon offering, but f4 hits issues of physics.
That lens exists today minus 100mm in length @ $11k retail (I paid $7,500 Canon refurb), weights 8lb and is large. They should be able to get a 200-500 f5.6 if you look at the Nikon offering, but f4 hits issues of physics.
Once again, this rumor must be true and I can prove it with a highly regarded scientific method.
I just purchased the 100-400 Mk ii + 1.4 extender.