There must be a whole lot more people shooting birds and cats at a distance than I do, or who have incredibly stable hands. I find even using 135-200mm takes a lot of concentration and effort to hold still enough, even with SR, to satisfy my desire for sharpness, and I'm usually backing away even with the 70mm lens.
135-400 and 120-300 seem absurdly long unless you're shooting motorsports on closed circuits, an air show or wildlife on the African veldt. The DA*60-250/4 seems the longest lens I could possibly be interested in. Godfrey On Jan 31, 2007, at 8:21 AM, Patrick Genovese wrote: > Yes it would be like carting a howitzer around but damn useful i used > the sigma 120-300 on a n...n D200 and its a nice combo and very nice > zoom range for shooting sports with 1.5x focal length crop. > > I'm willing to pay the weight penalty for the functionality. I like > compact gear but i;m not one to sacrifice all on the altar of > compactness. > > Regards > > Patrick > > > On 1/31/07, Leon Altoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Do you know how heavy a DFA 120-300 f2.8 would be? I'd end up never >> taking it with me. >> >> I'd be really happy with a sharp 250mm f4 on a K10D. >> >> >> -- >> Leon >> >> http://www.bluering.org.au >> http://www.bluering.org.au/leon >> >> >> Patrick Genovese wrote: >>> You know what would be really really really nice a pentax 135-400 >>> f/4.5 it would make a great pair with the upcoming 50-135 f/2.8... >>> the 60-250 is a bit of a compromise ...had it been a 120-300 or >>> maybe >>> 350 it would be a much better fit in Pentax' lens line. a 120-300 >>> f/2.8 would be lovely especially if it were a DFA* ie you could >>> use it >>> on film as welll...... Ahem!! Wake up patrick.. stop dreaming! >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> On 1/31/07, Leon Altoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> Hi Patrick, >>>> >>>> I've been watching this thread with interest as I'm looking for >>>> a good >>>> 200mm+ zoom. I've always thought the 70-200 f2.8 was too heavy >>>> and not >>>> quite long enough. I've seen some really nice pictures from the >>>> Sigma >>>> 100-300, but I've seen some with very annoying bokeh too that >>>> have put >>>> me off a little (I've noticed this with a few Sigma lenses). >>>> >>>> Then I heard of the DA*60-250 and I thought it sounded "just >>>> right". >>>> Now I have to sit and wait for it to be available - and then for >>>> it to >>>> be available in Australia. I'm hoping for some good 10MP >>>> examples with >>>> it before I can get my hands on it to prove that it's good. A >>>> DA* lens >>>> should be very good shouldn't it? Has Pentax made any duds in >>>> their >>>> high end lenses? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Leon >>>> >>>> http://www.bluering.org.au >>>> http://www.bluering.org.au/leon >>>> >>>> >>>> Patrick Genovese wrote: >>>>> Thanks for the info... I was hoping that someone would trash at >>>>> least >>>>> one of the combos making my decision easier :-) The problem with >>>>> Malta is that you have to buy almost on faith... There is no >>>>> way i'm >>>>> going to be able to try out a 70-200 f/2.8 or a 100-300.. >>>>> unless I go >>>>> abroad. >>>>> >>>>> Regards -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
