[Mbaez]

Thanks Swip Hoping for a 150-450 ( sigh ) and then I can stay even further away

This is one of marabu catching a platanna ( a frog whose colloquial name would translate into 'flat Anna' ) They are not the most beautiful of birds and when they become older really looks as if there a scrotum hanging from their throats

Odd looking indeed.

[normhead]

I have a question for the club. What would you pay for am FA 400/5.6? I know they are uncommon, but considering what the price of a DA 150-450 is, what is the FA400 Truly worth. I happened on a copy yesterday and the asking price was over $3000CDN and my first impression in terms of value was take a zero off and we can talk.

I wouldn't pay more than a DA*300 and 1.4 TC less the value of the warranty on the new equipment and depreciation. After all, it's unlikely after an accident you'd be able to get an FA 400 repaired. I've sent my DA*60-250 out for repair twice. I paid less than $2000 CDN for my Tamron 2.8, which with the Tamron 2x TC gives me 600mm 5.6, for less than $2000 CDN. I'd take a chance on the FA 400 5.6 for the right price. But probably not more than $1000 CDN. And I'd try it out with the 1.4 TC before buying. If it's not sharp or I it has CA or purple fringing that is magnified by the 1.4 with the 1.4, it's not worth as much practically. I like the idea fo the old lenses, but in practice, they have downsides. I tend to think of this kind of older glass as collectors items, not necessarily good every day glass. The exception being lenses like my Tamron 300 2.8, where there simply is no modern equivalent available.

[swip]

I have a question for the club. What would you pay for am FA 400/5.6? I know they are uncommon, but considering what the price of a DA 150-450 is, what is the FA400 Truly worth. I happened on a copy yesterday and the asking price was over $3000CDN and my first impression in terms of value was take a zero off and we can talk.

I got my copy from the forum at $1500 CAD. It is still working well for me. So, $3000 is definitely way too much.

[normhead]

I got my copy from the forum at $1500 CAD. It is still working well for me. So, $3000 is definitely way too much.

That sounds a lot more reasonable. How is the CA and fringing? Have you tried it with the 1.4?

[swip]

That sounds a lot more reasonable. How is the CA and fringing? Have you tried it with the 1.4?

CA can be an issue wide open, So I usually shoot at 7.1 and up. I don't usually shoot with TC but I think I did try it once. Focusing is definitely slow.

[Lowell Goudge]

I have a question for the club. What would you pay for am FA 400/5.6? I know they are uncommon, but considering what the price of a DA 150-450 is, what is the FA400 Truly worth. I happened on a copy yesterday and the asking price was over $3000CDN and my first impression in terms of value was take a zero off and we can talk.

3000CDN Is about 2400USD. Since I paid 1100USD for my FA*400about 18 months ago, I’ d say 3000CDN Is way too much. Then again, they aren’t making any more of either model. Its worth what the traffic will bear. I’d say 600-800USD for a really nice one might be fair. Actual sales price data is very hard to come by-good luck.

I wouldn't pay more than a DA*300 and 1.4 TC less the value of the warranty on the new equipment and depreciation. After all, it's unlikely after an accident you'd be able to get an FA 400 repaired. I've sent my DA*60-250 out for repair twice. I paid less than $2000 CDN for my Tamron 2.8, which with the Tamron 2x TC gives me 600mm 5.6, for less than $2000 CDN. I'd take a chance on the FA 400 5.6 for the right price. But probably not more than $1000 CDN. And I'd try it out with the 1.4 TC before buying. If it's not sharp or I it has CA or purple fringing that is magnified by the 1.4 with the 1.4, it's not worth as much practically. I like the idea fo the old lenses, but in practice, they have downsides. I tend to think of this kind of older glass as collectors items, not necessarily good every day glass. The exception being lenses like my Tamron 300 2.8, where there simply is no modern equivalent available.

I got my copy from the forum at $1500 CAD. It is still working well for me. So, $3000 is definitely way too much.

That sounds a lot more reasonable. How is the CA and fringing? Have you tried it with the 1.4?

CA can be an issue wide open, So I usually shoot at 7.1 and up. I don't usually shoot with TC but I think I did try it once. Focusing is definitely slow.

Thanks for all the replies. I didn’t realize how pricy this lens was until I got home and checked, so my initial suggestion to take a zero off the price probably was a little outrageous,

Considering I already have a DA 560, and a sigma 70-200/2.8 plus 1.4x and 2x TCs my interest here is purely a more compact lighter 400mm option, but not at that price.

I would need to check the optical quality and see how it stacks up to my sigma zoom considering my most often used apertures (with 2x Tc considered) are below F10

[normhead]

From this mornings walk.
K-3 and DA*60-250 and HD DA 1.4 TC

[Aaron28]

joe wheeler state park in poopy light...which includes my first owl capture ever..K-3ii...sigma 150-500os

[Des]

joe wheeler state park in poopy light...which includes my first owl capture ever..

Lovely shots and congrats on the owl capture Aaron. I can't remember where I read the expression "sullen as a daytime owl" but it seems to apply here.

[Aaron28]

Lovely shots and congrats on the owl capture Aaron.

thank you Des! thrilled to have captured one! now the goal will be in good light!

[Des]

thrilled to have captured one! now the goal will be in good light!

An owl in good light? That's pushing your luck! (Except for Snowy Owls and the like).

Some more wallaby shots. We have seen this girl (with the distinctive torn right ear) on and off for more than 6 years. Here she is with a joey in April 2015. To have had a joey she must have been at least 15 months old then. K-30 + Sigma 400mm f5.6 Tele Macro.


And here she is last month, June 2021 (with another joey in the pouch). KP + FA*300mm f4.5.




I read that they can live for 15 years in the wild.

[Aaron28]

An owl in good light? That's pushing your luck!

hahaha! right! i will still beg fer it!

[RobG]

Another of the many F-15SGs from the RSAF, performing the aerial display rehearsal.
With DFA 150-450. Hope to get better shots next weekend.

The exhaust diamonds are cool! It looks like lack of contrast was a problem - was there a lot of smog?

---------- Post added 19-07-21 at 11:59 AM ----------

'Climbing & burnin'.
F-15SG, Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF).

Nice! I wonder why Australia got the F18 instead of the F15.

[termy]

The exhaust diamonds are cool! It looks like lack of contrast was a problem - was there a lot of smog?

---------- Post added 19-07-21 at 11:59 AM ----------



Nice! I wonder why Australia got the F18 instead of the F15.

Am not actually too sure why the afterburner rings didnt come up more visible.

If anything, it is likely me.
I aint getting it right.

Will aim to do better this coming Saturday.

As for why Australia went for the 18 and not the 15, that i have no idea.
Have yet to look up the things surrounding this matter.

But yes, prima facie, it does appear to be an odd choice.

Essentially, Australia wanted to look for something which could come near (however "near" it could be since the F111 is really quite irreplaceable) to what the F111 could do, but in a smaller sized craft (relatively speaking).

So, yeah. F/A-18. somewhat odd.

[K2 to K50]

From this mornings walk.
K-3 and DA*60-250 and HD DA 1.4 TC

The second of the two butterflies is nice shot. Love the caterpillar - I think I have only ever seen one to photograph myself. The last flower shot with the fully open yellow flowers is very nice.