Haydon wrote:
Please find you way back to a Nikon thread. You're another one who has nothing to offer with a single posting.
I didn't say it was the correct solution for the OP, in fact I suggested the OP look at Sigma or Tamron who have Canon mount 150-600s.
What I did say was that it is not a completely worthless suggestion, if reach is what is needed, as it is far cheaper than using a Canon prime lens.
I am fascinated you assume I am a Nikon shooter. In fact I have never held a Nikon DSLR, using Canon (chosen at a time when I dreamed of acquiring the 50mm F1.0 unicorn) and recently some Mamiya/Phase One.
Haydon wrote:
These type of comments seem to be prevalent nowadays. Sorry JPL this doesn't help matters whatsoever. It's just negative reinforcement.
Is it? If the price difference between the Canon glass and the equivalent Nikon glass is big enough, it might make it worth buying a Nikon body to use the glass if you are comfortable with switching between the brands.
My quick research suggests the Nikon 200-500 is $1400 new from Nikon, the D500 is $2000 new from Nikon.
Canon don't appear to have any zooms longer than 400mm, so you are looking at using an extender to get the same reach on a zoom, or you are looking at the super-tele primes, which are going to be as expensive used as the Nikon bundle would be new.
If 500mm focal length is the goal, that Nikon bundle is hard to argue with if you want to stick to first party lenses, even for a Canon shooter.
However if reach is what is wanted I would suggest checking out the Sigma and Tamron options, as they both have 150-600mm zooms on a Canon mount. Sigma even have a 300-800 option though that is getting into Canon super-tele prime prices.
I have no experience with any of these lenses, so you can just discard my thoughts as keyboard theory.