One thing to always check into is close focusing before switching from prime to zoom. It is quite commonfor the prime to focus closer than the zoom. If one needs/wants close focusing then the prime might be the better choice. Seems I recall someone mentioning in this thread the FA* 80-200/2.8 doesn't focus very close.
--- Bruce Wednesday, October 1, 2003, 9:55:56 AM, you wrote: PE> The reason for my question and the comparison is that I have the other three PE> lenses. If I get the 80-200mm f/2.8 it would replace my 200m f/2.8 (any PE> interest?). The macro lens I'm keeping for macro and the 70-210mm f/4-5.6 PE> I'm keeping for times when the I want to travel light. Also when I get the PE> ist D a 200mm lens will be croped to a equivalent of a 300mm lens. A lens PE> this long requires (in my book) a tripod mount that the 2.8 zoom has. Of PE> course this is not the only reason, the zoom function will be handy as well. PE> But a big question is if I will have to give up to much in performance PE> switching to the zoom. PE> /Paul >>From: Peter Alling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: FA* 80-200mm f/2.8 >>Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2003 11:52:03 -0400 >> >>This is a silly question, look at what you're comparing, a fast sharp macro >>with a very fast zoom >>and a much smaller lighter prosumer zoom. >> >>I've never used the first two, I have the F 70-210. It's a very nice lens >>well built, (lots of metal). >>It's manual focus characteristics are like the 43mm Ltd, (same whirring >>noise that some people here have >>complained about), but less damping so it's a bit more fiddlie. This lens >>has very long focusing helical, >>almost like an old Manual Focus two touch lens. It takes 49mm filters >>which is nice, (no expensive 77mm >>filters for this baby). >> >>Both the FA* 200 and the FA* 2.8 80-200 have excellent reputations but here >>is the comparison that I'm sure >>of... >> >>You can pick one up a good to mint condition F 70-210 for between $90-$160. >>KEH currently has a FA* 80-210 listed in excelent-plus condition for $999. >>I'm not sure what the FA* 200 would go for at this point but at least $900+ >>new. >> >>So you have to ask yourself, is a couple of stops worth about $900? If you >>need it >>the answer is yes, even if you can't afford it, but in that case you still >>buy the F 70-210. >>The second thing is do I need the sharpness and resolution that a Prime >>will give me over a zoom? >>That's not so easy to answer these days. >> >>At 11:10 AM 9/30/03 -0700, you wrote: >>>What's the general opinion of this lens? Compared to the FA* 200mm f/2.8, >>>F 100mm macro f/2.8 and the F 70-210mm f/4-5.6? What about the weight? >>>And also if I can ask what you paid for yours used (of list if you want)? >>>I'm trying to determine what a reasonable price is. Any info about this >>>lens is appreciated. >>> >>>thanks >>>Paul >>> >>>By the way, I checked all the usual sources online. >>> >>>_________________________________________________________________ >>>Get McAfee virus scanning and cleaning of incoming attachments. Get >>>Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es >> >>I drink to make other people interesting. >> -- George Jean Nathan >> PE> _________________________________________________________________ PE> High-speed Internet access as low as $29.95/month (depending on the local PE> service providers in your area). Click here. https://broadband.msn.com
