<Post rearranged> On Tue, 29 Jul 2003, U+B Scheffler wrote:
> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 22:01:22 +0200 > From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?P=E5l_Jensen?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Newbie Questions > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Raimo wrote: > > A 4.5/80-200 SMC-M Pentax would fit your needs very well - if you can find > one. Very > sharp and contrasty (mine was sharper than 4/200 SMC-M Pentax that I had > before it). > Not expensive. > > > REPLY: > > You're the second, if not the third, who claims the M 80-200/4.5 is better > than the M 200/4. The M zoom represent the first generation of Pentax zooms > that really took off saleswise. Almost certainly because it was quite good. > The M zooms is not at all a shabby lens optically. Recommended as a budget > zoom. > > > Pål > > > So I am the fourth. Constant good results troughout the range. And good > bokeh, for nearby objects, too - see my july pug entry > http://pug.komkon.org/03jul/green.html > > Regards > Bernd There appear to be 2 versions of this lens, and they are different optically, the earlier being noticeably better. http://home.att.net/~alnem/html/pentax_zooms.html#80-200 Is there a way to tell them apart? Thanks, Kostas
