Me too - about the FA 100-300mm. It's really no good - very soft! Jens Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Raimo K [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 25. april 2004 08:43 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Re: Saturday Survey I�ll second the part describing the Pentax FA 100-300. Between 100 mm and 200 mm it was quite good but after that needed much stopping down. The Sigma 70-300 APO that replaced it is much better. All the best! Raimo K Personal photography homepage at: http:\\www.uusikaupunki.fi/~raikorho ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2004 7:53 AM Subject: Re: Saturday Survey > > I often used to wonder if I should have bought an LX, but in all > honesty the MX probably served me just as well, and I doubt if > I'd have got almost three decades of service out of an LX with > only two visits to the repair shop. > > I don't really regret any purchases. The closest to regret would > be the FA 100-300. That's also one of the very few lenses that I > have sold (the others being the Tamron 300/2.8 that was replaced > by the Pentax A*, and the M 80-200/4 that went in a 3-way trade > to get me the FA 80-320 I wanted to try using with the *ist-D). > > I don't suppose the 100-300 was really any worse than a couple of > the less favoured Pentax lenses I still have (M 28/2.8, M 40-80). > (Mind you, I'd consider parting with those, too - I haven't used > either of them in years). But once I got the 80-200/2.8 I found > I never used the 100-300, even though it was much lighter to carry. > The same doesn't seem to be true of the 80-320, although I think > I should wait a little longer before drawing definite conclusions. >
