Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (
More info?)
"Steve Gavette" <sgavette@no.cox.spam.net.4me> wrote in message
news:AdI6e.6339$%c1.1118@fed1read05...
>
> "1qa2ws" <1qa2ws@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
> news:d3f877$ail$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>>
>> "JohnR66" <nospam@att.net> wrote in message
>> news:GXE6e.561571$w62.444600@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> > >1qa2ws" <1qa2ws@gazeta.pl> wrote in message
>> > >news:d3ehum$ipo$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>> >> Is this lens good for dSLR? I found that some models have IF in
>> >> description? Is it different lens? I'm planning to buy an used one, so
> I
>> >> don't know what the difference is.
>> >>
>> >> 1qa2ws
>> >>
>> > I owned this lens when it came out in '95 (or so). As with many super
> tele
>> > zooms, it is soft at the long end and shows some color fringing near
>> > the
>> > edges. I was dissapointed with it and sold mine. I bought a Tokina
>> > 400mm
>> > AT-X APO to replace it. Much better. I would recommend getting a 75-300
>> > zoom and a fixed focal length 400mm. The 75-300 is light and easy to
> hand
>> > and the 400mm lens will perform better at wide apertures where it is
>> > needed.
>> > John
>> Because there is crop factor i dSLR, the color fringing near the edges
>> can
>> not occur, maybe? Is there any difference between 200-400/5.6 LD (IF) and
>> 200-400/5.6 LD? Or they are the same lenses?
>
> AFAIK, all were internal focus (IF). As was mentioned, it can be a bit
> soft
> at the outer extreme. I never noticed any fringing, but I didn't use it
> that
> much. I ended up getting a fixed 300 and a teleconvertor if I needed more.
> I
> still have the 200-400 with caps and original box. I was going to put it
> on
> EBay, but haven't gotten around to it. If you're interested in it, send an
> email. You should see if you can look at one in a local store to see if
> you
> like it. BTW, you didn't mention camera, and I don't know if they made
> different versions. This one is Nikon mount.
>
I have Maxxum 7d, thanks
1qa2sw
Facebook
Twitter