Thread: Which telephoto would you get?

For walk abouts shots ill buy the 300mm f/2.8 VR + TC20 EIII (or TC14EII)

For tripod mounted fixd location shots ill get the 500mm f/4 VR

I wouldnt get the 600mm as this is way to heavy and IMO unecessary. For me TACK SHARP is critical rather than reach. No point having the reach and only being able to take soft shots.

Now, as for brands, Nikon is waaaaaaaay more expensive than Canon, so a bummer for Nikon users

200-400mm f/4 VRII
and the 1.7 TC
or if you have a short lens (200mm f/2.8) the

500mm f/4 VR (the cream of lens )
and the TC2 III

Everything I've read suggests putting a TC on the 200-400 (even the new one) isn't a good idea. Also my understanding is the 500 isn't as good as the 400 and 600 now days.

Theres mixed reports around a zoom with TC but I agree, I would only put a tc on a prime and just keep the zoom as is. So you could have a 200-400mm AND a 500mm prime, for example. That would cover almost all the range for wildlife.

Originally Posted by dmdigital

Everything I've read suggests putting a TC on the 200-400 (even the new one) isn't a good idea. Also my understanding is the 500 isn't as good as the 400 and 600 now days.

I suggest you to have a look images from Sar Nop. He is a top avian photographer and use the 70-200VR, the 200-400VR and the 600 VR

Some of his images are in this thread:
TC20E III samples
http://sarnop.files.wordpress.com/20...-resize223.jpg

for the 600VR here:
Review : Nikkor AF-S 600mm f/4 G VR

A MATTER OF LIGHT • View topic - Female Superb Fairy-wren
sid=ddfcb4d98a1489b2e4e115aa04ce6714


Ronnie Gaubert have an extensive portfolio using several lens and among them he have very good images using the 500 f/4 lens
One of his images is here
Ruby-throated Hummingbird photo - Ronnie Gaubert photos at pbase.com
But I suggesting you to have a look his work, I guess that it is better than many not in real life technical reports

I'm not saying the 500 is a bad lens just the ones either side of it would appear to be better now. I already have a 70-200VR (the old model) and even on FS it is still brilliant the new version is IMO equally as good and possibly better, though I missed the focus lock buttons when I borrowed one. I've already had a look at most of those links you've posted, it's pretty hard to argue with what those guys achieve.

The 200-400 offers versatility but isn't as sharp, is heavier and longer and doesn't take any TC half as well as either a 300 or 400 f/2.8. The 300 is also about the same price and realistically all of them are best with a long lens mount kit on at least a monopod.

I think that THIS thread will be a good one to read

Some of the members have the 3 lens, 200-400,500 and 600 mm

Originally Posted by Chucaro

Some of the members have the 3 lens, 200-400,500 and 600 mm

Maybe thats what you need to do DM, if in doubt, buy them all!