kb6kgx wrote:
Some good advice, here. The lens I had was the non-ED version, by the way. As I said, I didn't have much experience using it. The PF is out of the question simply on price. I never considered the fresnel issue you mentioned. Very interesting. So, your recommendation would be the AFS version. Yes?
You can get a PF for $1,000. You do get paid for photographing fire damage, right? Ii just can't get over the PF. It's light as a feather, it's like a macro, focusing down to about 5 feet. It's as sharp as sharp can get with a 300 f/4. I keep mine on a body all the time, because I use it so much. But if you've been using that wide zoom, you probably don't need the PF.