I bought one used on ebay when ebay prices were on the earth, I paid I think somewhere in the neighborhood of $1200, plus it came with the 1.4x teleconverter, a steal really.
Its an amazing lens, razor sharp, even with the teleconverter. But its heavy, needs an extremely steady(heavy) tripod, and is lacking a handle to carry it with, so its cumbersome. Took some interesting shots, including some of a eagle's nest with chicks, but I seldom use it anymore. Maybe I'll put it up on ebay, and with today's crazy prices, may sell it for more than I paid for it. A fellow PDML member in my area has the M*300 f4, and its way lighter and more versatile. gonz On 9/11/07, Hal Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What are thoughts on the Pentax A 300mm f2.8? > > > >From: "Henk Terhell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > >To: "'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'" <[email protected]> > >Subject: RE: The occasional 300mm > >Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 17:06:56 +0200 > > > >I got the FA 80-320/4.5-5.6 for many years (the black edition) but > >almost never use it because I find it very soft from around 200 mm (on > >film and digital), whereas the DA 50-200/4-5.6 has not disappointed me > >at all. > > > >Henk > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > > > Behalf Of David J Brooks > > > Sent: 10 September, 2007 4:24 PM > > > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > Subject: Re: The occasional 300mm > > > > > > > > > Not sure if it was Bruce or Paul S but one of themhad the > > > 80-320 and those pictures looked pretty good. > > > > > > I think very highly of the Sigma 300F4. > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > On 9/10/07, Bong Manayon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi everyone! > > > > > > > > My professional work does not really require anything > > > longer than my > > > > 28-105 or 135mm lenses but ever so often I wished I had something > > > > longer. I had a Sigma 55-200 for a while but I sold that > > > one. I was > > > > thinking of getting the DA 50-200 but I would like to use it on my > > > > film bodies as well so why not something like the FA J 75-300? My > > > > problem is I could never really get my hands on one > > > (there's none in > > > > the Philippines; have to get it online) to test it and it > > > does suffer > > > > bad rep for being 'cheap' so I wonder how bad it really is. > > > > > > > > Your thoughts? Is that a waste of time and should I get something > > > > like the FA 80-320 (there's a couple of old stocks floating around > > > > locally)? Or, maybe even Sigma's or Tamron's 70-300? Their prices > > > > float around $150... > > > > > > > > Bong > > > > -- > > > > Bong Manayon > > > > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >[email protected] > >http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > _________________________________________________________________ > Gear up for Halo(r) 3 with free downloads and an exclusive offer. > http://gethalo3gear.com?ocid=SeptemberWLHalo3_MSNHMTxt_1 > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
