I've seen online that people who compare the 50-200 to the 55-300 universally proclaim that the 55-300 is "much better".
I am not a HUGE zoom user, but I discovered this weekend that the 50-200 doesn't really cut it for anything other than "casual use" - I kept cranking it down to f/11 to get sharp shots of birds in the water. I also have the old F 80-200/4.7-5.6 which is much better IMO than the 50-200. But - is the 55-300 even better than that? For approx $250 I'd consider getting the 55-300 for better reach and sharper images.. what do y'all say? Who's had experience with any (or all) of these? Cute as the 50-200 is, it'll probably be for sale when I get (if I get) a replacement. -Charles -- Charles Robinson - [email protected] Minneapolis, MN http://charles.robinsontwins.org http://www.facebook.com/charles.robinson -- 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.
