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?
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.
Interesting.
My primary use for a zoom in this range is for racing on the Isle of Man, where I found a 70-200 would have been just about perfect for the sight lines I normally work with. That's why I acquired the A70-210/4 Macro. Most of the time, I'll be working in the 135-210mm range.
A couple of things have caused me to re-think whether this was the right lens for the job.
- The A70-210 is a pretty large, heavy lens.
- It's zoom and focus action is not particularly quick (heavily damped).
An AF lens which is a bit lighter and has the ability to run follow-focus in Sports preset mode might be a better choice. I'm more inclined to like the fixed-length design of the 100-300 rather than the telescoping design of the 80-320. If the 100-300 is satisfactorily sharp in the target zoom range, it might be a more attractive alternative to me. Both the 80-320 and the 100-300 are lighter than the A70-210 (by 100g and 50g respectively according to Dimitrov's site) and I like the two-ring design for action work more than the push-pull combined focus-zoom as well.
Stuff to think about. I have a month and a half before I have to have everything settled for the trip. I've also overbought on lenses, figuring out what I wanted, so I'll be posting a list of what I don't want to keep soon.
Godfrey
