Posted by Lindy Martin on January 2, 2013 at 1:34 PM
Anyone know which lens (200-400 VR, 500 vr, 600 vr) has the fastest autofocus on a d300 or d700. I have the opportunity to try these out on a rental and want the fastest focusing one. I am going to be photographing owls in flight. (White on white)
Thanks in advance,
Posted by Dan Roberts on January 2, 2013 at 2:15 PM
I own a 200-400 and have used a 600 for a week. Between those two I would put my money on the 600. Although they are both theoretically f/4 lenses, the prime lenses pass light better than the zoom. I've actually read someplace that the actual "t-stop" of the 200-400 is more like f/5 than f/4. Subjectively the 600 seems brighter to me looking through the viewfinder. And to clarify, I wouldn't differentiate in terms of speed between the two but rather in terms of accuracy, particularly for low contrast situations like you are describing. The D300/700 theoretically only focus down to f/5.6 so if the "t-stop" theory is correct, the 200-400 is pushing closer to that limit than a true f/4 lens.
Now if I've totally confused the issue, let me say it plainly, from my own limited experience my opinion is that the prime lenses will focus "better" than the 200-400.
The catch is now you have to decide whether the zoom adds enough to the equation to outweigh the potential downside. Decisions, decisions....
My 2 cents, having owned and used all of these. The 200-400 is a great zoom, but slower than the others. I'd rule that out of the equation
Now, I'll add another wrinkle to consider.
owls are fast and erratic flyers. Will you be hand-holding or using a tripod? if hand-holding, the 600 is impossible. the 500 IS possible, with practice. (98% of my bif shots are hand-held) I rarely use a tripod because i can't track BIF fast enough. Maybe you can - I'm a klutz around tripods.
Also, being practical, will you need to be carrying the lens/tripod/head very far ? The weight of the 600 would be problematic to me. The 500 is heavy, but less so and manageable. Whatever you decide, get the lens at least a day before so you can peactice!
Good luck! Have fun and I wish you great shots!
Sandy
Posted by Dan Roberts on January 3, 2013 at 6:22 PM
I forgot that aspect which Sandy brought up. The 600 is MASSIVE. One reason I rented it was to check out the size/weight because I also shoot a lot of hand held BIF. The 500 is only slightly larger/heavier than the 600. To get to the point, based on that experience I decided against buying the 600 even though it was awesome for the particular shoot that I used it on. Just too restrictive due to size/weight for general purpose use.
Discussion
3 repliesThanks in advance,
Now if I've totally confused the issue, let me say it plainly, from my own limited experience my opinion is that the prime lenses will focus "better" than the 200-400.
The catch is now you have to decide whether the zoom adds enough to the equation to outweigh the potential downside. Decisions, decisions....
Now, I'll add another wrinkle to consider.
owls are fast and erratic flyers. Will you be hand-holding or using a tripod? if hand-holding, the 600 is impossible. the 500 IS possible, with practice. (98% of my bif shots are hand-held) I rarely use a tripod because i can't track BIF fast enough. Maybe you can - I'm a klutz around tripods.
Also, being practical, will you need to be carrying the lens/tripod/head very far ? The weight of the 600 would be problematic to me. The 500 is heavy, but less so and manageable. Whatever you decide, get the lens at least a day before so you can peactice!
Good luck! Have fun and I wish you great shots!
Sandy