JoshI Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
I'm interested. I've toyed with the idea of the Tamron and Sigma 150-600's (even rented the Tamron for a week), but I wasn't impressed enough to pull the trigger. The Tamron was sharp enough in the center out to about 500mm, but it really needed to be stopped down to f8. I found the VC lacking compared to most modern Nikons. The combination of the light weight, poor VC, and narrow aperture made it difficult to shoot handheld on my D800E (1/1000th at f8 needs a lot of light). Perhaps the Sigmas are better, but they haven't been readily available for long and most of the testing I've seen says they perform about on par with the Tamron.
I rent a 500/4G two or three times a year for work and I wouldn't expect a superzoom to replace it, but it would be nice to have something longer than my 70-200 the rest of the year. If the 200-500/5.6E is good enough in the center at 500mm at f5.6 that I don't need to stop down to f8 and the AF-S and VR are what we'd expect from a modern Nikkor, I'll probably pony up for one.
Reading through the specs of this lens though, it just kills me that Nikon didn't decide to build a 500/5.6 prime. Similar build quality and features to the 300/4E (without the PF though) at a $2500-3000 price point. I would have been all over that and I bet I'm not the only one.
Josh
|