01-08-2016, 09:47 PM
Well, the Canon 300mm f/4 IS and the classic Nikkor 300mm f/4 are just as big and a 300m f/4 lens remains a 300mm f/4 lens.
But yes, the smaller image field should have made it a little less fat at least.
While not really comparable the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 - thus an APS-C lens - is in a similar ballpark.
About skills & size - there are many example of "too big" lenses from classic manufacturers - take the Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 or Milvius 21mm f/2.8, the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8, Canon 35mm f/1.4 II or a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART.
But yes, the smaller image field should have made it a little less fat at least.
While not really comparable the Pentax 60-250mm f/4 - thus an APS-C lens - is in a similar ballpark.
About skills & size - there are many example of "too big" lenses from classic manufacturers - take the Zeiss Batis 85mm f/1.8 or Milvius 21mm f/2.8, the Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8, Canon 35mm f/1.4 II or a Sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART.