[genotypewriter]

[quote name='Yakim' timestamp='1297289127' post='6012']

I'm sure many people thought the same way when the 200-400 VR was released. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



http://www.bythom.com/nikkor-200-400mm-lensreview.htm

[/quote]

I agree with your point but not sure if I agree with how Thom does things <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='popo' timestamp='1297169889' post='5959']

Don't think I've ever seen one available, and even if I did and could afford it, I'm not sure I would want to hand hold it! I'd estimate equivalent to a 300/2.8 (600/5.6) would be about my limit here, so the 400/4 would fit in.

[/quote]

Yes, it's a very heavy lens but at those lengths you need a good gimbal head anyway.

[popo]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1297302377' post='6016']

Yes, it's a very heavy lens but at those lengths you need a good gimbal head anyway.

[/quote]

For my style, I usually like to keep mobile so I've never been one to even carry a monopod let alone a tripod. Focal length isn't a problem. 640mm (actual focal length, used on APS-C) is easy, 800 is ok with even the oldest IS system, and only beyond 1000mm does it become impractical for me to freely hand hold accurately. That isn't the killer though, and for those bigger lenses I don't think I have the arm strength to hold them up too long too often.



Just for fun, I have tried 1350mm f/13 with no IS and... that didn't go well at all!