Bob Blakely mused: > > All refractor 300mm or longer lenses should have a tripod mount. I don't > like hanging all that cantilevered weight on the camera mount. > > Regards, > Bob... > ------------------------------------------------ > "A picture is worth a thousand words, > but it uses up three thousand times the memory." > > From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > On 9 Apr 2005 at 19:36, Bob Blakely wrote: > > > >> I traded my SMCA* 300/4 in on an SMCA* 300/2.8 ED (IF). > >> $750 + tax cash from my pocket > >> > >> I may be wrong, but I think the bottom line is fair. > >> > >> I am beginning to miss that light weight a bit though... > > > > I think that you did very well on the deal, my A300/2.8 cost me a damn > > site > > more than that. It is a great lens but the weight means that I don't get > > out > > with it a lot, unfortunately I seem not to have it with me when it would > > give > > me the most advantage (David has his 300/4 when we go trekking). I'm > > considering the purchase of a slower 300mm lenses at the moment but I > > can't > > understand for the life of me why they didn't provide a removable lens > > mount on > > the FA300/4.5 :-( > >
