>>4363438I've thought about branching out into Canon or Nikon for the wider selection of super telephotos for wildlife
but I don't do enough to make either that or the FA* Pentax stuff worth it
>>4363554idk man what type of photography do you usually do?
why is the 70 2.4 hard to justify?
if it's the max aperture, try the 77 1.8 instead, it's like a smaller, cheaper 85 1.4 (that or just get a 85 1.4 from Sigma or Tamron or the FA* version)
if it's the focal length on APS-C, then both the 85 and 70-200 will suck as well
though the latter may work if you're looking for a wider-aperture zoom compared to the 150-450
if it's to pad out your FF collection in preparation for a K-1 then I guess between the two I'd say 70-200
