Kiron Kid
No longer a newbie, moving up!
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
- Messages
- 138
- Reaction score
- 59
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
I very recently purchased the 70-200 f/4 VR glass. It’s much smaller and lighter than the f/2.8 version, and every bit as sharp.
I would not use a 70-200/4 as a general "walk around lens."
Too big, and too heavy, for me.
I agree. The f/4 version is fairly compact and light. My “walk-around” glass is my 24-120.
View attachment 202767
You must be a BIG guy, cuz I have the 70-200/4, and while lighter than the f/2.8 lens, I do not consider it "compact." Smaller than the f/2.8 lens yes, but not compact.
I will gladly take the length of the 70-200/4. Because to make it shorter (and compact), it would have to be an extending lens. Most of extending zooms that I have run into have a stiff or STIFF zoom ring. This is from having to shove the optics and extending barrel in and out of the lens. I'll take an internal zoom, where there is less mass to move, and a nice light zoom ring.
Not big at all, but compared to the f/2.8 version, it’s quite a bit more compact.