08-31-2010, 07:28 PM
[quote name='Brightcolours' timestamp='1283280117' post='2381']
Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G SSM <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />
And of course the compact Canon EF 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM.
And then there were/are the Zeiss/Contax Vario-Sonnar [color="#FF0000"]T*[/color] 70-300mm F4-5.6, and the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar [color="#FF0000"]T*[/color] 100-300mm f4.5.
But yes, you of course are right. It is quite expensive.
[/quote]
Well, an MSRP of 900$ translates to 700$ on the streets. That's not too bad actually but surely not cheaps. The MTFs look good for such a lens.
The 40-150 ED is somewhat more disappointing actually - it is (physically) longer than its FT cousin ...
Sony 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G SSM <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />And of course the compact Canon EF 70-300mm f4.5-5.6 DO IS USM.
And then there were/are the Zeiss/Contax Vario-Sonnar [color="#FF0000"]T*[/color] 70-300mm F4-5.6, and the Zeiss Vario-Sonnar [color="#FF0000"]T*[/color] 100-300mm f4.5.
But yes, you of course are right. It is quite expensive.
[/quote]
Well, an MSRP of 900$ translates to 700$ on the streets. That's not too bad actually but surely not cheaps. The MTFs look good for such a lens.
The 40-150 ED is somewhat more disappointing actually - it is (physically) longer than its FT cousin ...