The SMC-M 80-200/4.5 is as good as the SMC-M 200/4.0 wide open, but that was not your special qauestion ...
-----------------original message------------------------------------ Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 15:45:20 -0400 From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: 200/4 and 200/2.5 vs. 70-210/4 (was--oh, who cares what it was) Bill Peifer wrote: Also, anyone know how the slower Pentax 200's -- say the 200/4 - - -- stack up against the A70-210/4 at 200mm? That is, does it make sense to get, e.g., a K, M, or A 200/4 rather than using the A70-210/4 at 200mm and wide open? Answer: Two or three list members have written that the 7-210/4 is so good at 200 that they can't justify getting a 200/4 prime. I don't know spefically whether this comment applies wide open, but I'd bet only the SMC K 200/4, with its 58mm filter size, might be better wide open. <snip> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
