On Apr 15, 2010, at 5:06 AM, David Mann wrote: > On Apr 15, 2010, at 12:09 PM, Doug Franklin wrote: > >> I was lucky enough to get the Sigma 400 for US$500 right after it was >> discontinued maybe five years ago. I haven't researched their used prices. >> Though I'd love to have the FA 400/5.6 or, better yet, the FA* 400/2.8 (or >> F*?), I can't justify the cost for the amount I'd use it. I'd like to have >> the FA* 300/2.8, but the same logic applies. > > I don't think Pentax made a 400/2.8 with AF. I don't think I'd want one due > to the weight and super narrow DOF. I really must use my FA400/5.6 more > (same goes for all of my lenses, really). > > I wouldn't mind an 80-200 f/2.8 myself. > I don't think I'd trade my 60-250/4 for the 80-200. The extra 50mm on the long end is frequently used as are those 20mm on the short end, and I doubt I'd be shooting wide open very long. DOF is plenty narrow at f4 for all practical purposes and long lenses aren't well suited to low light. What's more, the lens's best aperture at focal lengths up to about 150 is f4, and at 250 mm, f5.6 is optimum. That rocks.
> Dave > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
