Originally posted by Blue Isn't that the same hood that is used on the FA* 300mm?
I believe it's the same hood as the FA*80-200.
Originally posted by Pentaxor it's nothing more than a collector's item nowadays. I don't think the metal built and PZ function should command a higher premium. generally speaking, people would be much more happy using a $300-$500 Tammy.
I think I'd agree with that. Compared to my Tamron 28-75, the FA*28-70 felt too heavy and the sharpness wide open above 50mm wasn't nearly as good as the Tamron (see next comment). Sure the build was better in that it felt more solid and was mostly metal, but not to the point where it was worth anywhere near the premium (to me).
Originally posted by Boris I had an opportunity to buy this lens from a fellow forum member. Upon examination of the images he's sent me I noticed that the specific sample offered was too soft wide open to warrant a premium price. Not the seller's fault really - just a fact of life. Presently I settled for Sigma 24-60/2.8.
I owned the FA*28-70 in question. There's no question that softness wide open, specifically at or above 50mm, is probably this lens Achilles Heel (that and the hide price tag). It was a hard lens for my to judge because shoot test shots against the Tamron, the FA* wasn't as sharp, but the final output of a lot of similar shots I took with both lenses, I did end up preferring the output of the FA*.
All that said, I both bought and sold mine for around $800. They seems to be going for even more money now, which would only make me more likely to go for a Sigma 24-60 or Tamron 28-75 if I were choosing again.