Scott24

I have a super tak 300mm f4 looks and operates as if new.
Optically are they obsolete as far as resolution, color replication clearly mechanically they are beautifully engineered ? I don't know if it would be worth buying a converter for use on my Canon DSLR as I currently use a Tamaron 70 /300 which is a good image stabilized lens for the price but weak at 300.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I have that lens and the adapter can be bought in the $10 range for your Canon DSLR. The lens is optically pretty good, don't know if it will keep up with your Tamron but you might be surprised.... I was close to this bird so his head is not in great focus but the clarity in can see in his chest feathers is a bit surprising for an old lens.

(Download)

Billiam13 Loc: Youngstown, Ohio

I purchased a Ashai Pentax Spotmatic II at the Navy Exchange at NAS Atsugi, Japan in the early 1970's. I believe it came with a 50 mm lens. It replaced an old Argus (pictured) handed down from my parents. Loved the built in light meter.

Fotoserj Loc: St calixte Qc Ca

My first SLR, Spotmatic II, with a 50 and a whooping 135

MickyB

I switched from Canon to Nikon in 1987. Never regretted it. However, I've used a couple of Pentax cameras during the years. Gotta admit, I was really impressed with the image quality of their lenses. Especially a 105mm that I used for comet photos.

BebuLamar

Canon started to pass Nikon only after 1987. So you prefer to stay with #2.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

You switched around the time Canon rolled out their new EF/USM lenses.
I switched from Pentax to Canon in 1995 because I preferred those in-lens AF motors to what Pentax and Nikon were doing. I was in good company - that was about the time that Canon became market leader.

MickyB

Prior to 1987 I never would have thought I would have made the switch from Canon,.... till I tried out the Nikons. In 2007 the company I was contracted to supplied Canons for inspection and photo records. They were used in climate extremes. We went through 3 of them in less than a year. Their next purchase was a Nikon. We used it for 6 years without a hitch of any issues in the same conditions until it was hit by a truck. When it was obviously beyond repair they updated to guess what,... a Nikon. This is just one example. Without getting into the nuts and bolts of it, Chevrolet outsells Mercedes. So I assume sales is what you are basing your comment on. I don't think it would be accurate to refer to Mercedes as #2 or 3 or 4 or whatever. I've never had anything to complain about the Nikons. That is not to say that Canons are bad cameras. Just that more folks apparently make their buying decision based on something less than experience. If I thought their was a better choice I'd make it. Havn't found one yet.

BebuLamar

I used Nikon since 1977 and didn't switch but I do realize the Canon has surpass Nikon after 1987. Their EF lenses were a good move. Their AF system were better than Nikon.

MickyB

Yeah,.. the EF's were definitely a game changer in films last heydays,... beginning in "1987". But that was over 30 years ago. A lot of water has gone over the dam since then. Big picture, in the last 10 years or so Canon has had some catching up to do with the more current Nikon's AF system. As I said earlier, my decision has been made on past experience. Camera features have always been a moving target. Turning this into a Ford vs. Chevy discussion is an exercise in futility.