I got the FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 for many years (the black edition) but almost never use it because I find it very soft from around 200 mm (on film and digital), whereas the DA 50-200/4-5.6 has not disappointed me at all.
Henk > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of David J Brooks > Sent: 10 September, 2007 4:24 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: The occasional 300mm > > > Not sure if it was Bruce or Paul S but one of themhad the > 80-320 and those pictures looked pretty good. > > I think very highly of the Sigma 300F4. > > Dave > > On 9/10/07, Bong Manayon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi everyone! > > > > My professional work does not really require anything > longer than my > > 28-105 or 135mm lenses but ever so often I wished I had something > > longer. I had a Sigma 55-200 for a while but I sold that > one. I was > > thinking of getting the DA 50-200 but I would like to use it on my > > film bodies as well so why not something like the FA J 75-300? My > > problem is I could never really get my hands on one > (there's none in > > the Philippines; have to get it online) to test it and it > does suffer > > bad rep for being 'cheap' so I wonder how bad it really is. > > > > Your thoughts? Is that a waste of time and should I get something > > like the FA 80-320 (there's a couple of old stocks floating around > > locally)? Or, maybe even Sigma's or Tamron's 70-300? Their prices > > float around $150... > > > > Bong > > -- > > Bong Manayon > > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
