i would usually buy both lenses, test them, and keep the one that suits my shooting. however, i am short on time here and hoping to get a little guidance from you folks with experience with these lenses.
i am looking at getting a long lens to use with a technika IV. my next longest lens is a 240. after much research, i settled on a nikkor 300m - seems to be a staple with landscape folks on this, and every other, site.
thinking that there wouldn't be a big difference between the 240 i already use and the 300, i looked for longer alternatives. i heard a lot of praise for the 360 fujinon a, but i couldn't find anywhere a comparison between it and the nikkor. i am interested in shooting landscapes and performance at infinity.
i have come to the following two alternatives: -buy the 300mm Nikkor M and crop if it's not long enough -buy the 360mm Fujinon A
i don't like the idea of cropping and enlarging more than is necessary, but if the nikkor is as good as everyone reports, will that yield superior results to shooting the 360 straight on?
thanks for any insights, scott