VR is not effective, in fact it is detrimental, under 1/500 second and since most bird photography is at considerably higher speeds VR/IS/OS should be switched off to prevent interference. Therefore the number of stops of efficacy is irrelevant 99% of the time, OK of course for your other forms of photography.
I believe all of the above is spot on with the exception that the 7100 can provide AF at up to f8 and not f5.6. The cameras use the centre 11 focus points - more than enough for bird photography (where many use centre point only anyway to prevent AF confusion).
Both my birding pals use the Canon 100-400L. It is a very fine lens at shorter distances and in decent light but they put it away as soon as the light dims and don't even attempt many long range shots (except for record shots). The light issue is the worry I'd have with the new 80-400 VR.
I have the Sigma 100-300/2.8 (which works brilliantly with the Sigma x1.4 and x2.0 TCs) and this is a far superior lens. Even so I hardly use it since buying the 300/2.8 and using it with Nikon's TC14EII and TC20EIII, these are simply amazing. I did trial the 200-400 too and it is also wonderful, if not quite up to the 300/2.8 level even though it is a more expensive lens.
If you are not bothered about the weight then consider the superb Sigma 120-300 too (not the new version which is quite expensive as it has just been released, but the previous OS version). The Nikon weighing in at 1,570g and the Sigma at just over 3 kgs !
Some fine shots indeed in those albums from the OP. I'd like to ask if you have had a chance to add a x1.4 and if so how was the AF and sharpness ?
Last edited:
