Originally posted by Driline I question whether the F*300 f4.5 is perhaps a better lens than the FA*300 f2.8 for less than half the price?
No doubt I am thinking on the similar lines. But did not find a copy for $500. So ended up getting this DA*300 @ f4 which is stellar on K-1.
---------- Post added 07-24-17 at 06:05 PM ----------
Originally posted by normhead The big thing for me with 2.8 lenses i their use with TCs.I use my Tamron 300 with the F 1.7x to give me 510 and 4.5. And I stack TCs on my DA*200 to give me 467 6.3 is I want the light weight package. In either case, it's the 2.8 starting point that makes these numbers possible. However, 300 2.8 is a lot heavier than 200 2.8, like 4 times as heavy. The 300 4 with the 1.7x would still be 510 6.3 and a lot lighter than my 300 2.8. I have a blind in my back yard and a lot of ability to use a 300 2.8 lens without a lot of walking around carrying a heavy lens. I also put it in the back seat of the car for the 40 mile drive through Algonquin Park. But you really need a place to use it. By far the best lightest long lens combo is the 330 4 and the HD DA 1.4 for 420 5.6.
If you are one of those folks who sticks up their nose whenever the word "teleconverter" is used, disregard this post. 4 is fine for you.
Don't quiet stick up my nose with TeleCs but I don't like them in general. The DA converter is worth a shot though as it has been raved about for not degrading the image quality like most others do.
Also I think a sealed or WR lens is more preferred from durability perspective. The fungus thing kicks in in non-sealed lenses if not stored properly with desiccants (FA* I am thinking). So although I have a longing for the FA*300/2.8 most things/features that the DA*300 is offering are actually making me feel less longing for the FA*.
However the review of this FA*300 by one of the forum members @dsport still bothers me (in a good way). The images he ( @dsport ) posted in his
review from this lens are jaw dropping despite TC use. So yes it is evident that 2.8 matters with TC use.