The M200/4 is an excellent lens. I use mine frequently, with very nice results. My current PUG submission was shot with that lens, as was my entry of two months ago. The latter photo was shot directly into the headlights of a truck with no noticeable flare. I would guess that the Takumar pre-set is much more susceptible to flare, since it is not multi-coated. I also wonder how good it is optically, since Pentax redesigned it completely when they released the Super Tak version a few years later. It would be nice to have a tripod mount on a 200, but the M version is so light, it's not really necessary. Paul
Peter Jesser wrote: > > Can anyone give me an opinion on the Takumar 200 f3.5 pre-set? How good is > it wide open? How does it compare with the SMC M 200 f4? What would be a > fair price for the Tak 200 f3.5 and the SMC M200 4? The Takumar is quite a > big lens, and has a tripod mount attached. The extra half stop aperature > could be useful as I do some of my photography in low light conditions. > > Any advice based on experience with these lenses would be appreciated. > > Peter Jesser > Brisbane, Australia > > _________________________________________________________________ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp > - > 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 . - 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 .
