[RobA_Oz]

In the age of film, I used to take hand-held photos of lights at night simply by learning to hold the camera very steady as I tripped the shutter - I can still hand-hold 1/8 pictures.
These days, I just raise the ISO setting, sometimes to 12K or even 50K - I believe that is Pentax's 'solution'.

I did likewise with my film cameras, and although the SR and high ISO performance of modern digital cameras has considerably extended the possibilities for low-light photography, it’s also allowed us to forget or never bother with the old techniques. I catch myself falling into that trap occasionally.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

I seriously doubt that many are buying 300/2.8 lenses anymore (even the 70-200/2.8 lenses have lost some of their appeal). Ebay is full of Canon and Nikon 300/2.8 lenses at very low prices

I have been following the markets around here and they are not that many 300 2.8 at low prices. When I look at nikon 300 2.8 a used 300 VR1 goes around for $4999 +8 rating I feel this is nuts as you can buy a new one with VRII for $6900 I cannot see buying a lens that's production run was nearly 2 decades ago. When I see a VR1 that is below $3900 it's really welllll used. Even on the local selling sites I have seen what I would consider as +6 for a 300 VR 1 and offered $3800 for it and the seller didn't even consider it and it was sold not 8 hours later to someone willing to by it for $4500 and again I feel this is crazy for additional $2400 I can get a newer model that will have warranty and has a much longer serviceable live than that 2 decade old lens

I have even looked at the 500 f4 with in the current model if you can find a +7 and its under $9000 its not up for long and again I find this crazy as a new one can be had for $ 12500.00

[Smolk]

I did likewise with my film cameras, and although the SR and high ISO performance of modern digital cameras has considerably extended the possibilities for low-light photography, it’s also allowed us to forget or never bother with the old techniques. I catch myself falling into that trap occasionally.

Same here, although I also had to acknowledge that it did not always work, and current pixel-peeping makes us even less inclined to accept imperfection. Still, the old techniques can be useful.

[Pål Jensen]

I have been following the markets around here and they are not that many 300 2.8 at low prices. When I look at nikon 300 2.8 a used 300 VR1 goes around for $4999 +8 rating I feel this is nuts as you can buy a new one with VRII for $6900 I cannot see buying a lens that's production run was nearly 2 decades ago. When I see a VR1 that is below $3900 it's really welllll used. Even on the local selling sites I have seen what I would consider as +6 for a 300 VR 1 and offered $3800 for it and the seller didn't even consider it and it was sold not 8 hours later to someone willing to by it for $4500 and again I feel this is crazy for additional $2400 I can get a newer model that will have warranty and has a much longer serviceable live than that 2 decade old lens

I have even looked at the 500 f4 with in the current model if you can find a +7 and its under $9000 its not up for long and again I find this crazy as a new one can be had for $ 12500.00

Sure, if you want the latest and greatest with IS/VR almost brand new, you'll have to pay for it. But both Nikon and Canon 300/2.8 lenses with built in ultrasonic motors can be had from $1200 - $1500. A Pentax FA* 300/2.8 is often $3000+. A Pentax F* 300/4.5 is usually around $800+ whereas a same vintage Nikon 300/4.5 is can be had for $150.

[redpit]

Sure, if you want the latest and greatest with IS/VR almost brand new, you'll have to pay for it. But both Nikon and Canon 300/2.8 lenses with built in ultrasonic motors can be had from $1200 - $1500. A Pentax FA* 300/2.8 is often $3000+. A Pentax F* 300/4.5 is usually around $800+ whereas a same vintage Nikon 300/4.5 is can be had for $150.

Correct! It's a shame for Pentax users. I ended up getting a like new Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 300mm f/2.8 LD IF - 60B for those cases where I needed the 2.8 brightness and the lens is really capable, but it requires a lot of effort for nailing focus when there is not enough light. I would love to get a vintage AF lens from Pentax in the price category of the Canonikons...

[Serkevan]

Sure, if you want the latest and greatest with IS/VR almost brand new, you'll have to pay for it. But both Nikon and Canon 300/2.8 lenses with built in ultrasonic motors can be had from $1200 - $1500. A Pentax FA* 300/2.8 is often $3000+. A Pentax F* 300/4.5 is usually around $800+ whereas a same vintage Nikon 300/4.5 is can be had for $150.

In my side of Ebay, the Canons start* at ~1600€ ($1800), and that's for the old model, and in conditions that make the stuff look like they were used to cover the Iraq war. Cosmetically decent ones are 2000€+.
The Nikons with VR start at 2700€ from Japan, around 800-900 for the old model without VR. For the 300/4 Nikon, prices are more in the range of 300-350€, usually 400€.


The reason they are much cheaper is that there is at least one model that has superseded them and is objectively superior, so there's a good bunch of people who upgrade and put their old lenses on the used market. The supply is significantly higher than the demand, so the price is lower (because a good portion of the demand for such a lens is willing to pay three grand for the better lens). What does a Pentax user upgrade to, from the FA* 300/2.8? That lens is the latest and greatest for Pentax - so you'll have to pay for it, and you won't want to sell it to upgrade, so there's an entire two FA* 300/2.8 copies in Ebay right now. The comparison is apples to oranges.


*There are a couple at ~1200€ but from the UK so once one adds import duties and VAT on top and it gets to around 1500 as well.