This is supposed to be a friendly forum not one of those types where everyone is taking cheap shots at other posters. Go away and leave the discussion to those genuine members who value the site for good honest discussion that it is.

It's not misleading, you know what I mean. If you can't say anything constructive, then don't say it at all.

I have the Nikkor Holy Trinity of lens for sale. AF-S 70-200mm f2.8G ED VR 11, AF-S 14-24mm f2.8G ED, AF-S 24-70mm f2.8G ED.
Hardly used all in mint as new condition. All come with original boxes and manuals. These are NOT grey items and the Nikon world wide service warranty may be available depending upon where you live.

Comes with lens hood and protective bags.

I will ship free to buyer. Selling as one lot only, no separate sale of items.

Please nominate what price you would be prepared to pay for these 3 lens.

(Download)

I've been there twice, amazing place, one which you are unlikely to go back to ever. So you don't want to miss anything.
Reach, is the biggest issue you will face as you are unlikely to be close to anything. Take the longest lens you have got.

yes and expensive. Is the extra weight and cost worth it, I don't think so.

A couple of years ago I did exactly what you are thinking, upgraded from D7100 to D610. Differences in quality, very little, however with lenses substantial. I like the low light capability of the D610. Downsize is the extra weight of the whole outfit, body and lens. If you go and get the Nikon holy trinity of lens, then add a bag to carry all that gear, it get very heavy.

I've on an African safari and from my experience a 300mm is too short. Go as long as you can afford the cost and weight.

I have a D610, great camera. Stay with it as there's no real benefit in upgrading. Put the cash towards another lens.

Sorry, Bobby. As I said in my original post I already have this lens

As I said I use this regularly, so I know how far its reach is. So how am I wrong as you say?

I use this lens regularly, its great and produces fantastic shots. However, depending how far you are from the action it may not have enough reach.

I'm a frequent flyer both internationally and domestic and fly with my gear all the time. No issues ever. The only real problem you may encounter is weight. If I pack all my gear into the one carry on bag it will exceed the 7kg weight limit on all international flights. However I'm yet to have a problem.

The biggest issue with weight is the airlines weight limit of 7 kg for carry on. My current set up with the holy trinity and bag already exceeds that.

Thanks to everyone for their comments, all very helpful.

The main reason that I wish to leave my 2 existing lens at home is the extra weight on the plane and carrying them around on long hikes etc. Therefore the nikon 200-500 or the tamron 150-600 doesn't solve this problem.

I shoot with a Nikon D610 in both RAW and JPEG. I'm travelling later this year to northern Canada and Greenland and need help on deciding which lens to purchase. I already have the nikon AFS 24-70 ED 2.8 and nikon AFS 70-200 2.8 G2ED. With the wildlife that I hope to encounter I think the 70-200mm even with a TC14E 1.4 converter will not give me a enough reach.

I'm considering purchasing either the nikon AFS 28-300mm or the nikon prime 300mmF4. I would then leave the 2 heavy lens at home.

Can anyone assist with some views on which would be the better lens to take on my trip. The primary purpose is to shoot wildlife.

Thanks in advance

Russ