Godfrey DiGiorgi mused:
>
> A point of curiousity...
>
> I've seen references to the 80-320 on DPReview and have seen some
> impressive pictures with it. How does it perform relative to the
> F100-300/4.5-5.6 that I've also seen? And compared to the A-70-210/4?
My opinions:
I bought the 100-300 (along with the 28-105) when I bought my PZ-1p.
I no longer own the lens - I just wasn't happy with it at the long end.
I've recently accquired the 80-320 as a walking-around lens for my D.
It, too, gets soft at the long end, but not enough to make me regret
the decision.
By all reports the A 70-210 should outperform either of them. But
of course it's not going to do that well above 210mm :-)
I'd rank them in the order 100-300 80-320 70-210.
This shot of John C. from our recent NorCal PDML meet
<http://jfwaf.com/PDML/images/PDML22.jpg>
was taken with the 80-320 @ 260mm, f5.6 (which is wide open at that
focal length), hand held at 1/320.
(Using auto-focus, which doesn't work that well with the A 70-210)
