03-16-2012, 07:09 AM
[quote name='Chhobiwala' timestamp='1331864606' post='16758']
Sorry, but 50-500OS would be costing me about $600 extra, way beyond my budget and I am little jittery about buying Sigma lenses as these are reported to be varying widely from copy to copy...
[/quote]
Nikon lenses can vary widely from copy to copy too. And the 50-500 old and new are so superior for your purposes than the Nikon 80-400mm, that that may have a bigger impact than copy variety.
Even though the 300mm f4 is not the sharpest 300mm around, I think the 300mm with 1.4 TC may still beat the 80-400mm, but at only 420mm and without VR it is the least flexible option.
The Tamron 200-500mm has decent optics too, but at least with the Canon version its AF is making it quite a dog to use. The Nikon version using the internal D90 motor may well behave a lot better. Lacks image stabilization too, of course.
Sorry, but 50-500OS would be costing me about $600 extra, way beyond my budget and I am little jittery about buying Sigma lenses as these are reported to be varying widely from copy to copy...
[/quote]
Nikon lenses can vary widely from copy to copy too. And the 50-500 old and new are so superior for your purposes than the Nikon 80-400mm, that that may have a bigger impact than copy variety.
Even though the 300mm f4 is not the sharpest 300mm around, I think the 300mm with 1.4 TC may still beat the 80-400mm, but at only 420mm and without VR it is the least flexible option.
The Tamron 200-500mm has decent optics too, but at least with the Canon version its AF is making it quite a dog to use. The Nikon version using the internal D90 motor may well behave a lot better. Lacks image stabilization too, of course.