Pixel Perfect wrote: maratus wrote:
It's skinnier than 70-200/2.8 everywhere except for the very front part and has fewer elements (and supposedly smaller mid/rear elements to emphasize weight reduction). I don't see why it can't be lighter than 70-200/2.8 (1.4kg) while maintaining the same build quality.
So what are you saying now?
I can't say I'm disappointed, but now I just hope that all the extra weight results in uncompromised IQ and low copy to copy variation. At this point (1.4kg+) weight savings over mirrorless + new gen supertele are too close to not being worthwhile, especially if accessories for another camera system are taken into account.
And I'm not sure if Chinese factory is capable of a supertelephoto-grade build quality.
There's still a massive advantage in price over anything f4 including Sigma, so I'll probably go for it.
I'd suspect that it's a lack of FL elements that makes it not able to beat the weight of the shorter 70-200. If this combined PF and FL elements, they'd probably bring the weight down more, but at a much higher cost. They've made a bit of compromise, I'd guess, to keep the price relatively low. It would be interesting to see if you could combine the tech in this lens and the Sony 400mm f/2.8 to make even lighter lenses. If they can get optical quality of the PF lenses to match that of the big exotics, maybe one day we'll see those things shed a bunch of weight.
Aug 23, 2018 at 06:22 AM
Previous versions of reggieb's message #14568987 « "Official" Nikon 500 f/5.6E PF Discussion and Image Thread »
