>>3974870>>3974874Here's an old picture of mine that illustrates my problem.
It's taken at 400mm equivalent and f/5.2, and I'm not really in want for reach here, in fact I'm zoomed in too far.
What would have made this picture better is better noise performance of full frame (or even just a more modern camera), wider aperture and higher shutter speed. And I don't think it would have been a disaster to shoot at 200mm or at 300mm with a 1.4x teleconverter.
This is a problem with most of my >200mm and almost all my >300mm shots. I'm either zoomed in too far, or I could have been closer to the subject. Which leads me to believe I probably don't need the reach for my style of shooting.
