Just about everyone has made very sharp 100mm lenses. There are some
very good 200mm lenses. A good 400mm costs a fortune and weighs a ton.
At the moment for the 5D (don't know about N*kon) one can use a C*non
300/4 which is almost affordable and light enough to carry. The Tamron
400/4 should work very well on it. The faster longer C*non lenses cost
a small fortune and along with the weight of the camera are too heavy.
I think it is easier to find a very high quality 200mm lens that is
affordable and light enough to carry than to find a possibly slightly
lower quality 400mm lens that is both affordable and light enough to
carry. At a 400mm equivalent focal length, either system can give a
shallow DOF.
The Tamron 400/4 with 1.4x TC worked very well on my E1. I don't
think there are very many 800/4 lenses. Leica had/has a very nice
telephoto that does something like 400/2.8, 560/4, 800/5.6 by changing
the backend of the lens. It costs about $20k.
For long telephoto, the smaller sensors have an advantage.
-jeff
On 11/9/06, Winsor Crosby <wincros@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Granted the E-400 would have greater pixel density and may be better
> with the same focal length lens, but why not buy the lenses made for
> the camera and the area of view which you want? I seriously doubt
> the 10MP with a 200mm lens will be as good as the 5D with a 400mm
> lens of similar quality.
>
> Winsor
> Long Beach, California, USA
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|