Stanley McManus writes: > Terence wrote "As it is I find myself considering the 400mm F/5.6 > Canon with a low-end body. " > > Moose Peterson recommends the Tokina 400mm f/5.6 on an F100 or F5. He > claims it is abou the same as the all Canon setup. I have shot birds > using an N90s and a Sigma 400mm AF lens. It works, thoughmay not be > as fast as the setup Moose recommends. I just purchased the Tokina 400/5.6, after querying the list about it. I received one positive and one neutral comment. So far, I love it. I've only processed one roll of slide film shot with it (more are on the way). I was shooting an egret at sunset, and got some good results. I've been frustrated trying to do egret portraits w/ my 80-200, and haven't enjoyed lugging around the rental 300/2.8AFS or rental 500/4 EDIF-P lenses that I've tried. The 400 seems like a neat compromise. I'm shooting with an N90s. The autofocus speed doesn't thrill me (e.g. it's lousy compared to the 300/2.8 AFS lens that I've rented), but it's just fine for things that aren't too unpredictable (e.g. birds in flight). If something happens and the camera hunts (e.g. the subject slips out of the focus spot), then life's not so great. So far I've been shooting on a bogen 3221 with a 3262QR head. I'm looking forward to trying some hand held stuff in a bit more light. I'm quite happy that I bought the lens. g.
