Opticallimits > Forums > Nikon > Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review
Opticallimits > Forums > Nikon > Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Thread Modes
Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review
JJ_SO Offline
All-Star
*****
Posts: 4,031
Threads: 41
Joined: Feb 2013
Reputation: 22
#27
06-13-2016, 03:08 PM
No matter which long tele-zoom you choose: It's more "the lens is good enough to hold your camera", not the other way round.  Wink

All of these lenses weigh more than a D3300.

 

The Sigma Contemporary 150-600 or Tamron 150-600 are a bit lighter than the Nikon and about 25-30% less costly. Plus more range.

 

I never saw a direct comparison of the three lenses. I guess, the Nikon is not worse than any of the other two - but is it 25% better? menaing "worth the additional costs"?

Find
Reply
  


Messages In This Thread
Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review - by Bojan Stepancic - 09-13-2015, 10:49 PM
Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review - by Sridhar Madananth - 06-13-2016, 01:37 PM
Nikon AF-S 200-500 f5.6E ED VR first review - by JJ_SO - 06-13-2016, 03:08 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)