You suck even more than I thought possible... David Savage wrote: > On 8/14/07, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Kenneth Waller" >> Subject: Re: 300mm 2.8 AF: Sigma vs Pentax >> >> >> >>> FWIW - >>> >>> I have the FA 300mm f4.5, Its a wonderful lens even if it doesn't have a >>> tripod mount. >>> >>> Unless you absolutely, positively need the extra light a 2.8 aperture >>> provides, I find it very hard to justify the extra cost of the 2.8 300mm >>> over the 4.5 300mm. >>> >> Which 300/4.5 do I have? It must be the F. Mine has a tripod mount, and is >> wonderfully small, smaller than my FA200/4 macro. >> > > I have the FA version: > > <http://picasaweb.google.com/OzSavage/Misc/photo?authkey=TrIZRqTedfw#5096341721848299026> > > It's the one on the left. > > Cheers, > > Dave > >
-- cognoscenti: "Those who know" cognesnotty: The stringy material that forms in the nasal passages of "Those who know." -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
