This is a lens from the early 1980s. Agree that it’s niche, but it seems very fit for purpose as a lower light sports (dawn/dusk/indoors) lens. Depending on the size of wildlife and your patience it could also be a fine wildlife lens.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting that you buy one of these today. However, $6k doesn’t seem that far off today’s pricing. Sony’s 300mm f/2.8 retails for $6.7k.
I would probably get a decent amount of use out of a modern version of this lens due to kids in sports, but I’m not about to buy one due to $$. I’ll hold out for sunny days/earlier matches or rent a f/2.8 zoom for the occasional indoor ice show.
This is a lens from the early 1980s. Agree that it’s niche, but it seems very fit for purpose as a lower light sports (dawn/dusk/indoors) lens. Depending on the size of wildlife and your patience it could also be a fine wildlife lens.
I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting that you buy one of these today. However, $6k doesn’t seem that far off today’s pricing. Sony’s 300mm f/2.8 retails for $6.7k.
I would probably get a decent amount of use out of a modern version of this lens due to kids in sports, but I’m not about to buy one due to $$. I’ll hold out for sunny days/earlier matches or rent a f/2.8 zoom for the occasional indoor ice show.
Indeed. Due to the increased light sensitivity of modern cameras, those ƒ/2.8 options probably are the modern equivalent to this lens.