woollyback
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 1,417
- Edit My Images
- No
Folks,
I am still struggling with this super tele thing. I am not a rich man by any means so will only get one shot at this so want to get it as right as I can..
I have tried (handled) most of the Mk1 super tele's and they are all fantastic except the ergonomics - I cam to the conclusion that the 500mm f4 was the best compromise - 600 f4 was just too big and 400 f2.8 was mega but a monster.:nuts::nuts::nuts:
However....
The new versions have all been on a diet and the new 400/2.8 is just about the same weight as the original 500 f4. This got me a thinking that I could get with use of T/C's a 560/f4 which should be ace and a pretty useable 800/5.6. The lens graphs of theoretical performance look superb?.
Any thoughts or will a lighter 600/f4 still be a better bet.:shrug::shrug:
Anyone using the 400/2.8 with TC's?.
Cheers for any info
Rob
I am still struggling with this super tele thing. I am not a rich man by any means so will only get one shot at this so want to get it as right as I can..
I have tried (handled) most of the Mk1 super tele's and they are all fantastic except the ergonomics - I cam to the conclusion that the 500mm f4 was the best compromise - 600 f4 was just too big and 400 f2.8 was mega but a monster.:nuts::nuts::nuts:
However....
The new versions have all been on a diet and the new 400/2.8 is just about the same weight as the original 500 f4. This got me a thinking that I could get with use of T/C's a 560/f4 which should be ace and a pretty useable 800/5.6. The lens graphs of theoretical performance look superb?.
Any thoughts or will a lighter 600/f4 still be a better bet.:shrug::shrug:
Anyone using the 400/2.8 with TC's?.
Cheers for any info
Rob