DreDaze wrote in post #16434618
and the slowness of the lens makes total sense...have you seen the size/price of the 200-400f4 lens? with the ISO capabilities of todays cameras a slow lens isn't as big of a hindrance as it was in the past
I agree, and have been stating similar thoughts here for quite some time. The high ISO capabilities of today's bodies opens up new lens options for certain shooting situations. For example, I can now use my 70-200 f/4 IS to shoot indoor ice hockey -- something I could never do with my old Rebel XT or 40D, as I need an ISO of 6400 for the rink I shoot in.
tkbslc wrote in post #16434678
I think they might as well have made it a 200-600 or even 300-600mm, but maybe that wouldn't drop weight as much as I think.
I'd rather have a telephoto zoom that goes wider. When I travel, I will not bring along two telephoto lenses for my wildlife needs -- it is just too much gear, especially if traveling by air. A 300-600mm zoom would require me to also pack a 70-200 lens. Right now, I take either my 100-400L or 70-200 f/4 IS, depending on my anticipated reach needs and size/weight requirements.
If the wide end is going to be around 300mm, they may as well just make it a 600mm prime lens, IMO.