As title implies, I need your toughts about those two lenses - both
available in a BR store, in a distant southeast city so there is
absolutely no way to run tests. :-(
The FA 100-300 4.7 is a little more expensive, the Sigma 70-300 4.5-5.6
DL is some $30 cheaper. Both are used, signs of wear, both have been
serviced but they claim the maintenance was made by a sound shop. The FA
100-300 has a composite mount, from the pics I've seen, and is regarded
by some as a poor lens - so poor that the compact Sigma is a better choice??
Your comments are important - is there anyone who had hands experience
with both, and could elaborate on the differences? Is there any
important point in either lens that should dictate my choice?
I just received a M42 200mm 4.0 for the formal, slow performances, so
the intended purpose of this new lens is to be carried in my everyday
bag next to the DS and the kit lens. All my lenses should be able to
cover 35mm, and present aperture rings - the 18-55 being excused since
it came along the DS.
TIA, folks!
lf
--
Luiz Felipe
luiz.felipe at techmit.com.br
http://techmit.com.br/luizfelipe/
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
