fbpixel

Moderators: Greg Downing, E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC - 5 hours

  
« Previous topic | Next topic »  
Reply to topic  
 First unread post  | 2 posts | 
by Wildflower-nut on Thu Jun 13, 2019 5:25 pm
Wildflower-nut
Forum Contributor
Posts: 606
Joined: 04 Mar 2008
In examining the weights, the Canon 400 f2.8 and 600 f4L are weight wise less than the Canon 500 f4L. Is the 500 f4L (other than cost) examining the weights, the 400 f2.8 and 600 f4L are weight wise less than the 500 f4L. Is the 500 f4L (other than cost) still competitive? What niche does it fill the other two don't.ve? What niche does it fill the other two don't.


Last edited by Wildflower-nut on Thu Jun 13, 2019 7:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 

by Neilyb on Fri Jun 14, 2019 5:42 am
User avatar
Neilyb
Forum Contributor
Posts: 2710
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Location: Munich
Wildflower-nut wrote:
In examining the weights, the Canon 400 f2.8 and 600 f4L are weight wise less than the Canon 500 f4L. Is the 500 f4L (other than cost) examining the weights, the 400 f2.8 and 600 f4L are weight wise less than the 500 f4L. Is the 500 f4L (other than cost) still competitive? What niche does it fill the other two don't.ve? What niche does it fill the other two don't.


The 600 is still longer and the 400 still bulkier. For travel the 500 is, despite weight, easier to carry and fit in carry-on luggage. It is also cheaper than either mk3 lenses. ;) 
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by:  
2 posts | 
  

People Who Like This:
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group