Become a Fan

My Photo

Designed by

« iPhone: all the camera you need? | Main | iPhone 4 Flickr's most popular camera: official »

June 14, 2011


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


So how would you rate the 200 2 compared to the 300mm 2.8 as far as their suitability for bike shots is concerned?

Seb Rogers

The 200 is a bit shorter and about the same weight. On a DX body it gives the same angle of view as the 300 on FX, but with a whole extra stop of light :) Stick a 1.4x on it and it's a 280mm f/2.8; with a 2x it's a 400mm f/4. Three lenses in the same space that a 300mm takes up (though I'll be the first to admit you need to stop down at least a stop with the converters to get the best out of it).

It all comes down to whether you're on FX or DX, and how much reach you need. The 300's a bit too long on DX to be useful IMHO.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search this blog

  • Google

free counters