BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tjsimonsen" data-source="post: 1501524" data-attributes="member: 38764">Agree 100% with that.And thanks for the link to Nigel's picture, Kieth. That answers my question. The reasons I am looking at the 300/2.8 as an alternative to the 500/4 is not that I consider the 300+2xtc to be easier to hand hold or carry around. But that the former setup is way more flexible: a formidable 300/2.8, a great 420/4, and a very good 600/5.6 all in one go. The super fast 300 and fast 420 options are quite important as I sometimes find myself in situations where speed is more important than reach. Also, the setup is cheaper than the 500/4 and especially the 600/4 (this is important to an amateur like me), and it is probably considerably easier to travel with (on planes) than either of the longer monsters.Thomas</blockquote>