Beautiful shots. How are you finding the 200-400 compared with the 200-500
Cheers Gil, first off well spotted, the 200-400 only arrived late Thursday Afternoon and yesterday was my first very brief outing with it
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c4fb/1c4fb4a004ac374ae735c210f8560be0dce354ac" alt="Smile :) :)"
Thoughts so far are :-
1, it's ruddy heavy
2, Colour rendition is better than 200-500
3, Auto focus is a lot faster than 200-500
4, Background separation is better than 200-500
5, Bokeh is better than 200-500
6, Noise levels seem lower at same ISO than the 200-500 (might just be rose tinted glasses though)
7, It was a hell of a lot dearer than the 200-500
Even with it's short falls, for the money the 200-500 is a hell of a lens, and will be going back on the camera through the summer months I should imagine, when the light picks up and the walks get longer, I've lost some confidence in the 200-500 after BeValued (on behalf of the insurers) took ten months to repair it after I had a fall (long story don't ask), but these are my first thoughts after first outing, ask me again in a month or so
PS. I purchased a Tamron 150-600 MK1 as a stop gap while the 200-500 was being repaired, it is a very capable lens
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1c4fb/1c4fb4a004ac374ae735c210f8560be0dce354ac" alt="Smile :) :)"