I said the lenses were the same length when you have a lens hood mounted
on the K135 f2.5. The hood I use is the one from the SMC Takumar version
of the same lens. I've found the A*300 to be very good optically, it's
not great from that standpoint, very good though. When you take into
account it's compact size, and compared to most other relatively fast
300mm lenses it's extremely compact, it becomes great. It's only about
1/2 inch longer than the smc Pentax M 200mm. I'm sure there are sharper
300mm lenses but I can't think of one nearly as compact.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Your idea of "not much larger" is certainly a bit different than mine,
Peter. You might want to double check the figures over at Boz's site.
I've had both lenses at the same time, and the A*300 is seemed quite a bit
bigger than the K135/2.5 ...
As for its "greatness," well, we'll just have to disagree there as well. I
had two, and was not satisfied with either.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: P. J. Alling
I use the A*300 f4 it's a great lens, but it has a very long focus
throw, (you can't expect to change from closest focus to infinity
quickly), and it's closest focus is none to close, about 13 feet. On
the other hand it's not a lot larger than the smc P 135mm f2.5 with the
lens hood mounted and not a lot heavier.
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
