Either of those lenses will make you consider yourself very lucky that the FA 70-200 died.
Rick http://photo.net/photos/RickW --- On Tue, 6/8/10, Ed Keeney <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Ed Keeney <[email protected]> > Subject: Lens Help > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > Date: Tuesday, June 8, 2010, 9:53 PM > I'm in the market for a new lens and > looking for sage advice from the list. > > I'm currently using a K100D with the following zoom's... > FA 70-200 4-5.6 > FA 100-300 4.5-5.6 > > I find that the longer 100-300 is a little heavy so I tend > to lean to > the smaller 70-200. My problem is that the shorter > lens decided to go > belly up with some internal mechanism problems and I fear > it's beyond > repair (or can be repaired, but not sure it would be worth > it). > > I shoot the kids playing sports. They're still young > so I can get > pretty close to the action. I've attempted birding, > but find even the > 300 to be a little short (another day will bring a > discussion on > converters). > > I'm looking at replacing the broken lens (or both) with > either the DA > 50-200 4-5.6 or the DA 55-300 4-5.8. Does anyone have > real world > experience with these two lenses? I'm leaning to the > shorter 50-200 > due to cost and equivalent replacement. > > Thanks! > Ed > http://picasaweb.google.com/ewkphoto > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link > directly above and follow the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
