> You nailed it right on the head. I am assembling a flash-fill > outfit with my M 100/2.8 and a M-A 200/4 for field portraits and I > want to reduce weight as much as possible, thus the call for A or > M lenses. When you start adding up camera, lens, flash, flash > bracket and flash battery pack, pretty soon we're talking about a > lot of weight to carry around in the field. Every ounce I can > cut down will be a big help.
I understand, Ken. I guess I really didn't get it at first, though, since my only 200's at the moment are the K 200/4 and the K 200/2.5 - heck, in my case the SMC K 200/4 ~is~ the lightweight and compact one - <g>. I guess another (traveling lightweight) advantage of the M or A 200/4's would be the built-in hoods that I think both have (unlike the K 200/4). The hoods are a little short for a 200mm lens, but they still are somewhat useful, and you don't have to carry an extra hood necessarily (as you might want to with the K 200/4). Of course, the K 200/2.5 has a built-in hood... ;-) Fred
