|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 24
|
![]()
I rented the Nikon 80-400 VR to try it out hiking in the mountains a few weeks ago, and was happy with the image and build quality. However, as so many have noted, it's auto-focus is gawd awful slow. Using the focus limit button helps, but it's still nowhere near AF-S.
I know the lens has been out for a while, but does anyone have any insight into if Nikon will upgrade it to AF-S? And more to the point: Should I wait to see if they do upgrade it, or come out with something better before my trip to Ireland in 9 months? And yes, before you all jump on me to buy the 200-400 VR or 70-200 VR, I have considered them, but they have neither the range nor cost that I am looking for. |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 269
|
![]()
Yeah, 80-400 would have been great coverage for shooting football this fall, but both the slow focusing speed plus slow aperature kept me from going that route. An 80-400 AF-S 2.8 for say $1,000. Ahh, we can all dream, can't we? :G
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,599
|
![]()
Have you check out the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX?
![]() I have the Canon 100-400L IS which is quite similar to the Nikon 80-400 VR, but it's USM instead, but my Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX is head and shoulder above it in term of AF speed - i.e. it's HSM ultrasonic fast and silent! http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=66 ... even with a 2x TC (@ 600mm f/5.6): http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65 -> IMO the Sigma is absolutely a steal if you compare it to a 300 f/2.8 of any brand :idea: |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|