using the *istD, lenses that were adequate on film (using Provia 100F) were no longer adequate for me. they were not sharp enough, even for 8x10 work prints. that's why i got rid of most of them and have been acquring mostly * lenses. the one inexpensive Pentax lens i have is the FA 80-320, but i barely use it. even on back country trips, i would rather take the FA* 80-200 than lose the quality it offers, even though it weighs a lot more and needs a bigger tripod. after buying the *istD, the entire bottom half of the Pentax line became mostly useless to me because of image quality.
Herb.... ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 12:06 PM Subject: Re: FA* 80-200/2.8 discontinued > My personal experiences with pentax and non-pentax lenses similar to > the ones you mention suggests that a lens could be better than they are > and still not as good as the best on the market. I'd expect the 80-200 to > outperform the longer glass and wide-tele zooms. I'm curious how it compares > to, say, K 85/1.8, A* 85/1.4, K105/2.8, any good K/M/F 135, K150/4 or > M150/3.5, A* or FA* 200/2.8. I've used most of those lenses and I > find newer 70-200s to be better, at least in terms of sharpness.
