... has a plastic body ... ;-)
Translation: It's here now.
Just how sluggish (or not) is its AF speed?
The shell of the body is plastic - so what? A couple of expensive Nikkors are also not made of Magnesium. 300/4 PF E is such an example.
And the metal bodies of Fujinons just hide a couple of plastic parts inside. This I can say for the 56/1.2 because I saw these parts after the lens was cracked. I'd wonder, if anybody would find a single AF-lens without plastic parts.
AF-speed was definitely on par with the Fuji 100-400, or better. Others I could not compare.
WOW!
Waitting for you reviews!
And? How does it stack up against the 150-600 C?
Dustin Abbot reviewed the lens, he said:
The AF is fast and accurate in AF-S mode, however the tracking performance let the lens down, just not being able to nail moving subjects reliably, not coming near the Canon 100-400mm lens's AF-C success rate!
A pity as the lens is great in all other areas, maybe a FW update could do something to help.
The Canon 100-400 is a kind of a lens, which costs nearly 1000 $ more - but I also read a review which said, for stills the Sigma resolves better at better contrast. On the Nikon side of things, there's simply nothing to compete with. The 200-500/5.6 is a lot bigger and heavier.
You're really into long lenses now
http://flickr.com/ephankim
