On Tue, 14 Jul 1998 01:40:57 GMT, ac955@torfree.net (Tom Sapiano) wrote:

>I am looking into getting a 300mm f2.8 lens. I have looked at the Tamron
>and Sigma units so far. Although all of my other lenses are Nikons, I
>don't need this lens enough to justify their prices. First of all, why
>do these lenses cost so much less than the Nikons. Is their optical
>quality much less than the Nikor lenses? If any one has any of these
>lenses I would appreciate your input.
>Optical quality is important, so if there is a large quality difference I
>might consider giving up the spped to get the Nikon 300 f4. Any
>information on that lens would also be appreciated.

It seems to me that the point of lugging the ungainly beastie
about is so that you can make high-quality images, when desired,
at f2.8 - otherwise the f4 Nikkor is a fine lens, even at f4...
So, unless you are sure the other lenses provide the image quality
you would want at f2.8... (the Nikkor 300mm f2.8's are fine to the
corners wide open - and they are still good on the 1.4X and 2X
converters made for them, giving you the basis for a good long-lens
system). BTW, why not consider a used Nikkor f2.8? (I just happen
to have a very near mint late-version AIS I could be talked into
parting with...;-)