800/5.6L, 300/2.8L IS and 200/2L IS with the 1.4x and 2x extender. I shoot wildlife during the day and quit when it is night.
So come the Mark IIs of the 400, 500 and 600 do you think I'd need them?
Printable View
800/5.6L, 300/2.8L IS and 200/2L IS with the 1.4x and 2x extender. I shoot wildlife during the day and quit when it is night.
So come the Mark IIs of the 400, 500 and 600 do you think I'd need them?
I don't see any need for a 400 and 600. If it is in your budget the 500 might come in handy at times.
Definitely not the 400. But it sure is nice to have some glass over 500mm that is faster than f/5.6. I own both the 500 and 600, and there are times when they both come in handy. If I had to choose one and I already owned the 800, I'd go with the 500.
Would go for the 500 Probably overall most useful !!!
I didn't think of it that way, thanks. What I dislike about the 600 and 400 are the weight. Other than that they're good optics. :)
Yep, weight it is.... Used to use 500 most of the time, now moved to 300 2.8 IS and I find that I am using it more. I will definitely get the 800 IS one day, but not the rest.
-- V
I'm asking what to prioritize for next generation gear.
Where I live Nikon and Pentax have piss poor support so the Canon's the only game in town. Not to mention the local Nikon distributor's owners blocked my exit from a room so I do not want to invest in them. I am also heavily invested in the system so switching would be painful. Not to mention Canon has some FL that Nikon doesn't have.
