Absolute Reef
New member
points taken guys, appreciate that.
I say it's just a matter of preference. I think 70-200 vr alone produces exceptional images and light enough to carry around, expensive but yet affordable. If you just go to the zoo to see some captive wild animals...I believe you will be just fine for any given situation. On the other hand, if you are going to have a safari trip in africa or any other part of the world, say that you are really going in to the wild, then you need an extra reach. If that was the question for this thread, my answer would have been different. Nikkor 400 f/2, or even 600 f/4 would really be great choices. You might as well need a big tripod that mounted to the safari truck too.
I am not really a big fan of tele-converter or any other lens adaptor. I just like my lenses the way they are. Sacrifice "one thing" to get "another thing",....well, that "other thing" should be something worth it (better images) or else I would rather stay with that "one thing" I already have. I don't think I would want to carry anything bigger or heavier than 70-200 (umm...may be 2,900g 200 f/2 would be my last choice) to go to the zoo with my kids, it's just not fun.
D300 + 70-200 VR --- focal length 110 @ f/2.8 , 1/640 shutter speed. ISO:auto, picture is jpg converted from nef file, non-crop , non-post process.
I say it's just a matter of preference. I think 70-200 vr alone produces exceptional images and light enough to carry around, expensive but yet affordable. If you just go to the zoo to see some captive wild animals...I believe you will be just fine for any given situation. On the other hand, if you are going to have a safari trip in africa or any other part of the world, say that you are really going in to the wild, then you need an extra reach. If that was the question for this thread, my answer would have been different. Nikkor 400 f/2, or even 600 f/4 would really be great choices. You might as well need a big tripod that mounted to the safari truck too.
I am not really a big fan of tele-converter or any other lens adaptor. I just like my lenses the way they are. Sacrifice "one thing" to get "another thing",....well, that "other thing" should be something worth it (better images) or else I would rather stay with that "one thing" I already have. I don't think I would want to carry anything bigger or heavier than 70-200 (umm...may be 2,900g 200 f/2 would be my last choice) to go to the zoo with my kids, it's just not fun.
D300 + 70-200 VR --- focal length 110 @ f/2.8 , 1/640 shutter speed. ISO:auto, picture is jpg converted from nef file, non-crop , non-post process.
