A*300mm f4 & A 2x-S TC

[shots worth sharing]

<p>I recently bought a used A*300mm and I've been having fun testing it against my DA*300mm. The results have been <em>very</em> interesting (so much so that I feel a need to verify some things before posting about it) but I just have to share this: The A* 300mm & A 2x-S TC is proving to be a pretty amazing combination. <br /> <br /> This photo is slightly tweaked to compensate for resizing but not sharpened at all.<br>

<img src="http://dadipentak.smugmug.com/photos/880217248_gdYMH-L.jpg" alt="" width="800" height="532" /></p>

<p>and here's a (<em>totally</em> unprocessed) 100% crop.</p>

<p><img src="http://dadipentak.smugmug.com/photos/880217384_9guAW-L.jpg" alt="" width="750" height="600" /></p>

<p>And, yeah, I know--but getting closer was not an option at that moment. ;~)</p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Dave,<br>

That's a big, herkin' f 2.8, correct? It looks like a very serious optic indeed. The detail in that bird is very good considering there's no post processing. Now the DA* is f 4, correct? I would be very curious in your analysis and your evidence. More photographs please!</p>

<p>ME</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>Oh, I'm sorry, Michael! No, this is the A* 300mm f/4--much smaller (fits in my side-saddle lens case which is what attracted me) and way less expensive that the DA* f4, much less an f2.8.</p>

<p>"Herkin'"? LOL!</p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Dave,<br>

Thanks for the clarification. I've seen pictures of the A* 300mm f2.8 and it was very substantial. Still, when you get a chance, comparison pictures from both of your 300mm lenses would be appreciated. Thanks.</p>

<p>ME</p>