Forum menu
[url= http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=4875 ]Can I have two please?[/url]
This focal length is perfect for sports, zoos etc (i.e 90% of what I shoot) and I'd have it welded on to a body if I owned one.
There is just the small matter of the cost.............. 😯
I want this one:
[img] 
[/img]
300m f2.8
Only £5k.
Personally I'd go for the 200-400
[img] 
[/img]
The Nik 200-400 and 14-24 f2.8 are the two killer lenses that Canon haven't had in their arsenal. How they can justify the 3X cost of the Nikon equivalent I don't know.
Molgrips
I've used the Canon 300 and 400 f2.8's and the 500 f4. If money we no object I'd own a 300 and 500. 400 f2.8s are just that bit too big.
The Nik 200-400 and 14-24 f2.8 are the two killer lenses that Canon haven't had in their arsenal. How they can justify the 3X cost of the Nikon equivalent I don't know.
I've got the 14-24 f2.8, superb piece of glass, just got to save up for the 200-400!