FA* 400 vs 150-450

Butch5 · 01-05-2017, 07:16 PM

Has anyone compared these two lenses? I imagine that the FA* 400 would be sharper. However, I wonder about image quality. My primary use of either would be birds and wildlife. If anyone has these lenses can could give their thoughts on them I'd greatly appreciate it.

**Clinton** · 01-05-2017, 07:41 PM

I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this.

Butch5 · 01-05-2017, 07:52 PM

Originally posted by Clinton

I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this.

Thanks! I figured it would be lighter. I'm not worried about the weight. My main concern is image quality and sharpness.

Adam · 01-05-2017, 08:00 PM

Originally posted by Clinton

I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this.

Yeah, the newer lens does a better job of controlling aberrations, and also focuses more quickly- but the size consideration is a key one. Too bad there's no quick shift on the 400mm

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)

PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Butch5 · 01-05-2017, 08:22 PM

I have an F* 300mm f4.5 and it has spoiled me as far as sharpness is concerned. It is incredibly sharp. I'm wondering if the FA* 400 or the 150-450 can compare to it.

noelpolar · 01-05-2017, 08:40 PM

Originally posted by Butch5

I have an F* 300mm f4.5 and it has spoiled me as far as sharpness is concerned. It is incredibly sharp. I'm wondering if the FA* 400 or the 150-450 can compare to it.

I have a F*300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F*300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F*300/4.5 is a special lens.

HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F*300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course).

I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process.

Butch5 · 01-05-2017, 09:10 PM

Originally posted by noelpolar

I have a F*300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F*300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F*300/4.5 is a special lens.

HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F*300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course).

I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process.

Is your F*300 sharper than the 150-450?

noelpolar · 01-05-2017, 10:43 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Butch5

Is your F*300 sharper than the 150-450?

mmmm... hard for me to give a meaningfull answer..... I don't shoot that much around 300mm with the DFA..... more towards 450..... or at whatever FL suits the circumstance (I'm probally 80% reach and 20% zoom when I'm using the DFA) and if size is an issue then the 300 it is. Anyway, once compromising to get 400+ FL I rather the DFA then 300 plus TC.... for both IQ and FL flexability (money aside).

I do think the F*300 probally does have a slight advantage over the DFA IQ at 300..... but not enough to make or break a shot.... unless it's in low light.... I like F8 on the DFA about as much as I like f5.6 on the F*300.... so with light transmittance factored in there is a couple of low light stops there in the 300's favour.....mostly K3 based thinking here.

Once the K-1 is introduced then it's mostly about reach, and the low noise of the K-1 sensor off sets the light eating of the DFA to some extent. I tend to think of the F*300/4.5 on the K-1 as a 200/2.8 almost!

I'd never sell the F*..... as the size, IQ and it's build are extra extra special..... It is my 5th lens that fits in a Domke F- 5XC along with a 20,31, 43 and 77 with a K-1 or K-3 when travelling "light".... but somehow complete!

Wild Mark · 01-06-2017, 12:39 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by noelpolar

I have a F*300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F*300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F*300/4.5 is a special lens.

HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F*300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course).

I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process.

As I do not have the DFA150-450 or FA*400 I cannot comment directly on this question.

However, I have compared the F*300 with the FA*250-600 and F*600. The F*300 is better than the FA*250-600 at commensurate focal length. The F*600 is better than an equivalent crop from the F*300, but the differences are minor. So, in regards to noelpolar's observations I whole heartedly concur on the 'specialness' pf the F*300.

I would be very surprised if the DFA150-450 has better IQ than the F*300. Even with a high quality teleconverter, I would be surprised to find the DFA150-450 has better IQ than the F*300.

This all said, I would be thinking the IQ differences across all mentioned lenses are minor. But, when it comes to portability, WOW, the F*300 is extraordinary!

If I were to speculate, I would suggest the FA*400 is likely to have better IQ and portability, but will require post processing as Adam pointed out.

**WPRESTO** · 01-06-2017, 06:58 AM

Reading through comments about the older 400 suggests it has substantial purple fringing, perhaps to an epic degree*. I think it was always an uncommon lens. I also suspect that the current 300 f4 + the latest 1.4X TC will provide a 420mm f5.6 with resolution at least as good, but with far less purple fringing, better edge-to-edge consistency, plus faster AF, closer minimum focus distance and full-time manual override. The 150~450 is excellent, focuses close, has quick AF, but above all is far more versatile than SFL or SFL + TC.

*A lens-specific preset could probably be developed in LR or PS to eliminate or at least minimize this aberration.

FOLLOWUP: Looking at owner-reviews here on PF, 14 reviews for the 150~450mm but only 6 for the 400mm (smaller # = one very good or very poor review can substantially impact the averages).

150~450mm average first, then 400mm
overall: 9.64 versus 8.67
sharpness: 9.4 versus 9.0
aberrations: 9.4 versus 7.0

Seems to me those numbers tell the story: The 150~450 is at least as sharp, perhaps sharper, and it has substantially better control of aberrations. Overall, owners rate it a step up from the 400.

normhead · 01-06-2017, 08:36 AM - **1 Like**

Wow, a 9.64 rating. That's impressive.

That's better than the DFA 50 macro, DFA 100 macro and D FA 100 macro WR... but less than the DA*60-250 or DA*300.

A zoom that outperforms macro lenses, ask me how sceptical I am.

On second thought, no don't.

While I'm a big fan of the PF lens reviews, it's more for deciding if the way the lens is used is appropriate to your needs. Find someone who does what you do and see what he/she says. The sharpness numbers are extremely subjective and influenced by the price range of the lens.

The choice zoom or prime, is way more critical to your decision than the IQ of the images. Both produce excellent images.

Both produce some stinkers. I'd love to give an FA*400 a test drive although I'd suggest the DA*300 ƒ4 and TC combo make it largely redundant. That would give you 420mm ƒ5.6 with quiet focusing and two useful focal lengths instead of one. The apeal of a 400 5.6 escapes me.

**WPRESTO** · 01-06-2017, 08:48 AM

I agree with you, normhead, that owner reviews are not based on uniform criteria, but rather reflect what might be called "owner satisfaction." Is the owner getting what they expected or hoped for when they purchased the lens? The responses may also sometimes be biassed to some degree by experience with other lenses (previous telephoto a Vivitar 400mm mirror?) and also what the reviewer has seen in other reviews. If another reviewer thinks this lens is poor, am I being uncritical in thinking it is good? Nevertheless, the numbers on the two lenses under consideration suggest more satisfaction with the performance of the 150~450mm than with the the 400mm. I would read them as indicating that IQ is similar, the 150~450 definitely has better control of some aberrations, and overall owners of the 150~450mm are happier with their lens than are owners of the 400mm.

mikeSF · 01-06-2017, 09:07 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by noelpolar

I have a F*300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F*300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F*300/4.5 is a special lens.

...

Hi, I don't mean to derail the thread to talk of a different lens, but re: F*300 (which should be noted is an entirely different lens than the FA*400), the F*300 is indeed sharper than the DFA150-450 at 300mm. Nobody should expect otherwise as it is a quality prime specifically tuned at 300mm. I needed the longer length, but if i did not, I would certainly stay with the F*300. I have an excellent copy of the DFA150-450 and it is working very well for me at 450mm + 1.4x TC.
FWIW.

**WPRESTO** · 01-06-2017, 09:31 AM

Originally posted by mikeSF

Hi, I don't mean to derail the thread to talk of a different lens, but re: F*300 (which should be noted is an entirely different lens than the FA*400), the F*300 is indeed sharper than the DFA150-450 at 300mm. Nobody should expect otherwise as it is a quality prime specifically tuned at 300mm. I needed the longer length, but if i did not, I would certainly stay with the F*300. I have an excellent copy of the DFA150-450 and it is working very well for me at 450mm + 1.4x TC.
FWIW.

Try the 1.4X TC on your 300mm. Chances are the IQ will be indistinguishable from what you'd get with the 400mm at equivalent apertures, and unless my math fails me, you'll only be losing a half stop.

Kameko · 01-06-2017, 10:14 AM - **1 Like**

I can't speak about the 150-450, but the FA 400 is fantastic. It's sharper than most people give it credit for. It does have some horrible purple fringing, but it's easy to remove PP. It seems to lose in the "value" section of the PF reviews, which I generally ignore when reading reviews. It may be pricier for an older lens, but it's not out of this world. I don't think it's been rated fairly in the reviews section. When someone's looking to purchase a specific lens, they usually have an idea as to the cost and have come to terms w/it. People still seem to gripe about the price of it.

01-05-2017, 07:16 PM	#1
Butch5 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Georgia Posts: 69	*FA 400 vs 150-450** Has anyone compared these two lenses? I imagine that the FA* 400 would be sharper. However, I wonder about image quality. My primary use of either would be birds and wildlife. If anyone has these lenses can could give their thoughts on them I'd greatly appreciate it.

01-05-2017, 08:40 PM	#6
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Butch5 I have an F* 300mm f4.5 and it has spoiled me as far as sharpness is concerned. It is incredibly sharp. I'm wondering if the FA* 400 or the 150-450 can compare to it. I have a F300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F300/4.5 is a special lens. HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course). I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process. Last edited by noelpolar; 01-05-2017 at 08:53 PM.

01-05-2017, 10:43 PM - 1 Like	#8
noelpolar Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2013 Location: Goolwa, SA Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,310	Originally posted by Butch5 Is your F300 sharper than the 150-450? mmmm... hard for me to give a meaningfull answer..... I don't shoot that much around 300mm with the DFA..... more towards 450..... or at whatever FL suits the circumstance (I'm probally 80% reach and 20% zoom when I'm using the DFA) and if size is an issue then the 300 it is. Anyway, once compromising to get 400+ FL I rather the DFA then 300 plus TC.... for both IQ and FL flexability (money aside). I do think the F300 probally does have a slight advantage over the DFA IQ at 300..... but not enough to make or break a shot.... unless it's in low light.... I like F8 on the DFA about as much as I like f5.6 on the F300.... so with light transmittance factored in there is a couple of low light stops there in the 300's favour.....mostly K3 based thinking here. Once the K-1 is introduced then it's mostly about reach, and the low noise of the K-1 sensor off sets the light eating of the DFA to some extent. I tend to think of the F300/4.5 on the K-1 as a 200/2.8 almost! I'd never sell the F..... as the size, IQ and it's build are extra extra special..... It is my 5th lens that fits in a Domke F- 5XC along with a 20,31, 43 and 77 with a K-1 or K-3 when travelling "light".... but somehow complete! Last edited by noelpolar; 01-05-2017 at 11:12 PM.*

01-06-2017, 06:58 AM	#10
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,138	Reading through comments about the older 400 suggests it has substantial purple fringing, perhaps to an epic degree. I think it was always an uncommon lens. I also suspect that the current 300 f4 + the latest 1.4X TC will provide a 420mm f5.6 with resolution at least as good, but with far less purple fringing, better edge-to-edge consistency, plus faster AF, closer minimum focus distance and full-time manual override. The 150~450 is excellent, focuses close, has quick AF, but above all is far more versatile than SFL or SFL + TC. A lens-specific preset could probably be developed in LR or PS to eliminate or at least minimize this aberration. FOLLOWUP: Looking at owner-reviews here on PF, 14 reviews for the 150~450mm but only 6 for the 400mm (smaller # = one very good or very poor review can substantially impact the averages). 150~450mm average first, then 400mm overall: 9.64 versus 8.67 sharpness: 9.4 versus 9.0 aberrations: 9.4 versus 7.0 Seems to me those numbers tell the story: The 150~450 is at least as sharp, perhaps sharper, and it has substantially better control of aberrations. Overall, owners rate it a step up from the 400. Last edited by WPRESTO; 01-06-2017 at 07:10 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 150-450 vs Sigma 150-500 questions	stemked	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	18	05-28-2018 09:38 AM
Pentax D FA 150-450	carolina_sky	Lens Sample Photo Archive	3	09-21-2016 06:40 PM
Simple lens shootout Pentax HD DFA 150-450 vs Canon 100-400 II vs Sigma 150-600 C	beholder3	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	46	07-25-2016 12:33 AM
Nikon D7200+ Sigma 150-600 S vs Pentax DFA 150-450	Shanti	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	43	12-13-2015 09:02 AM
Nikon 80-400 VRIi vs Pentax DFA 150-450	Shanti	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	05-16-2015 09:03 AM

01-05-2017, 07:41 PM	#2
Clinton Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,912	I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this.

01-05-2017, 07:52 PM	#3
Butch5 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Georgia Posts: 69 Original Poster	Originally posted by Clinton I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this. Thanks! I figured it would be lighter. I'm not worried about the weight. My main concern is image quality and sharpness.

01-05-2017, 08:00 PM	#4
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	Originally posted by Clinton I can tell you definitively that the FA* 400 is a lot lighter than the 150-450. The 150-450 does have modern coatings and may perform better. @Adam might have an opinion on this. Yeah, the newer lens does a better job of controlling aberrations, and also focuses more quickly- but the size consideration is a key one. Too bad there's no quick shift on the 400mm Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-05-2017, 08:22 PM	#5
Butch5 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Georgia Posts: 69 Original Poster	I have an F* 300mm f4.5 and it has spoiled me as far as sharpness is concerned. It is incredibly sharp. I'm wondering if the FA* 400 or the 150-450 can compare to it.

01-05-2017, 09:10 PM	#7
Butch5 Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Georgia Posts: 69 Original Poster	Originally posted by noelpolar I have a F300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F300/4.5 is a special lens. HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course). I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process. Is your F*300 sharper than the 150-450?

01-06-2017, 12:39 AM - 1 Like	#9
Wild Mark Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Newcastle Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,954	Originally posted by noelpolar I have a F300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F300/4.5 is a special lens. HD Pentax-D FA 150-450mm F4.5-5.6 ED DC AW Reviews - D FA Zoom Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database Of note...I do believe the DFA 150-450's light transmittance is a stop to stop and a half down on the F300 for a given aperture.... I really notice this with the K3.... not so much with the K-1 as it's high ISO performance compensates (at the cost of reach of course). I have no fact base to go on, however, I wouldn't be surprise if the DFA at 400-450 provides better IQ than the FA400 and loses one stop of light in the process. As I do not have the DFA150-450 or FA400 I cannot comment directly on this question. However, I have compared the F300 with the FA250-600 and F600. The F300 is better than the FA250-600 at commensurate focal length. The F600 is better than an equivalent crop from the F300, but the differences are minor. So, in regards to noelpolar's observations I whole heartedly concur on the 'specialness' pf the F300. I would be very surprised if the DFA150-450 has better IQ than the F300. Even with a high quality teleconverter, I would be surprised to find the DFA150-450 has better IQ than the F300. This all said, I would be thinking the IQ differences across all mentioned lenses are minor. But, when it comes to portability, WOW, the F300 is extraordinary! If I were to speculate, I would suggest the FA*400 is likely to have better IQ and portability, but will require post processing as Adam pointed out.

01-06-2017, 08:36 AM - 1 Like	#11
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Wow, a 9.64 rating. That's impressive. That's better than the DFA 50 macro, DFA 100 macro and D FA 100 macro WR... but less than the DA60-250 or DA300. A zoom that outperforms macro lenses, ask me how sceptical I am. On second thought, no don't. While I'm a big fan of the PF lens reviews, it's more for deciding if the way the lens is used is appropriate to your needs. Find someone who does what you do and see what he/she says. The sharpness numbers are extremely subjective and influenced by the price range of the lens. The choice zoom or prime, is way more critical to your decision than the IQ of the images. Both produce excellent images. Both produce some stinkers. I'd love to give an FA400 a test drive although I'd suggest the DA300 ƒ4 and TC combo make it largely redundant. That would give you 420mm ƒ5.6 with quiet focusing and two useful focal lengths instead of one. The apeal of a 400 5.6 escapes me.

01-06-2017, 08:48 AM	#12
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,138	I agree with you, normhead, that owner reviews are not based on uniform criteria, but rather reflect what might be called "owner satisfaction." Is the owner getting what they expected or hoped for when they purchased the lens? The responses may also sometimes be biassed to some degree by experience with other lenses (previous telephoto a Vivitar 400mm mirror?) and also what the reviewer has seen in other reviews. If another reviewer thinks this lens is poor, am I being uncritical in thinking it is good? Nevertheless, the numbers on the two lenses under consideration suggest more satisfaction with the performance of the 150~450mm than with the the 400mm. I would read them as indicating that IQ is similar, the 150~450 definitely has better control of some aberrations, and overall owners of the 150~450mm are happier with their lens than are owners of the 400mm.

01-06-2017, 09:07 AM - 1 Like	#13
mikeSF Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: East Bay Area, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,622	Originally posted by noelpolar I have a F300/4.5 and a DFA 150-450.... a well know person on this forum "Mikesf" sold his F300/4.5 and recently got a DFA 150-450. He's written a review of the 150-450 in the lens database that you should have a look at....about 4 reviews down..... I concur with his comments... the F300/4.5 is a special lens. ... Hi, I don't mean to derail the thread to talk of a different lens, but re: F300 (which should be noted is an entirely different lens than the FA400), the F300 is indeed sharper than the DFA150-450 at 300mm. Nobody should expect otherwise as it is a quality prime specifically tuned at 300mm. I needed the longer length, but if i did not, I would certainly stay with the F*300. I have an excellent copy of the DFA150-450 and it is working very well for me at 450mm + 1.4x TC. FWIW.

01-06-2017, 09:31 AM	#14
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,138	Originally posted by mikeSF Hi, I don't mean to derail the thread to talk of a different lens, but re: F300 (which should be noted is an entirely different lens than the FA400), the F300 is indeed sharper than the DFA150-450 at 300mm. Nobody should expect otherwise as it is a quality prime specifically tuned at 300mm. I needed the longer length, but if i did not, I would certainly stay with the F300. I have an excellent copy of the DFA150-450 and it is working very well for me at 450mm + 1.4x TC. FWIW. Try the 1.4X TC on your 300mm. Chances are the IQ will be indistinguishable from what you'd get with the 400mm at equivalent apertures, and unless my math fails me, you'll only be losing a half stop.

01-06-2017, 10:14 AM - 1 Like	#15
Kameko Veteran Member Join Date: May 2012 Location: White Rock Photos: Albums Posts: 450	I can't speak about the 150-450, but the FA 400 is fantastic. It's sharper than most people give it credit for. It does have some horrible purple fringing, but it's easy to remove PP. It seems to lose in the "value" section of the PF reviews, which I generally ignore when reading reviews. It may be pricier for an older lens, but it's not out of this world. I don't think it's been rated fairly in the reviews section. When someone's looking to purchase a specific lens, they usually have an idea as to the cost and have come to terms w/it. People still seem to gripe about the price of it.