My previous reply to this message showed up as a blank, so I'll try again. I've gotten very good performance from both the FA 80-320 and the DA 50-200. With the possible exception of some "kit" lenses and FAJ and K-series Takumar budget lenses, Pentax lenses will deliver quality images when used correctly. Of course, there may be sample variation, particularly with less-expensive lenses, but I have yet to encounter it. If you need 300 mm reach and speed isn't critical, the FA 80-320 is a good inexpensive choice. The DA 50-200 will vignette at wider focal lengths on your film cameras. But, dollar for dollar, it's a very good lens. Speed is expensive. Paul DA 50-200: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6119287
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5458304&size=lg FA 80-320: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3113513&size=lg -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > David Savage wrote: > > On 9/10/07, Bong Manayon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Bong Manayon" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > So far, not a vote for the FA J 75-300 but the FA 80-320 creeping up > as a possible contender. I'm listening... > > Thanks! > > Bong > > On 9/11/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And I've gotten very good performance from both the FA 80-320 and the DA > 50-200. With the possible exception of some "kit" lenses and FAJ and K-series > Takumar budget lenses, Pentax lenses will deliver quality images when used > correctly. Of course, there may be sample variation, particularly with > less-expensive lenses, but I have yet to encounter it. If you need 300 mm > reach > and speed isn't critical, the FA 80-320 is a good inexpensive choice. The DA > 50-200 will vignette at wider focal lengths on your film cameras. But, dollar > for dollar, it's a very good lens. > > Paul > > DA 50-200: > > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=6119287http://photo.net/photodb/photo?ph > oto_id=6119287 > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5458304&size=lg > > FA 80-320: > > http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=3113513&size=lg > > -------------- Original message ---------------------- > > From: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > David Savage wrote: > > > > On 9/10/07, Bong Manayon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi everyone! > > > >> > > > >> My professional work does not really require anything longer than my > > > >> 28-105 or 135mm lenses but ever so often I wished I had something > > > >> longer. I had a Sigma 55-200 for a while but I sold that one. I was > > > >> thinking of getting the DA 50-200 but I would like to use it on my > > > >> film bodies as well so why not something like the FA J 75-300? My > > > >> problem is I could never really get my hands on one (there's none in > > > >> the Philippines; have to get it online) to test it and it does suffer > > > >> bad rep for being 'cheap' so I wonder how bad it really is. > > > >> > > > >> Your thoughts? Is that a waste of time and should I get something > > > >> like the FA 80-320 (there's a couple of old stocks floating around > > > >> locally)? Or, maybe even Sigma's or Tamron's 70-300? Their prices > > > >> float around $150... > > > >> > > > > > > > > I can't recommend the DA 50-200. I bought one while on my recent trip > > > > because I needed something longer than what I had taken with me. And I > > > > was underwhelmed with it's performance. > > > > > > > > The 80-320 isn't too bad for the price. All but the last 2 of these > > > > were taken with it: > > > > > > > > <http://www.arach.net.au/~savage/GESO/GESO_001/index.html> > > > > > > > > I'm pretty harsh on these consumer zooms, since having got the FA* > 80-200mm. > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > > > > > > > Dave > > > > > > > > > > > These are really quite impressive for an old, slow, "consumer" zoom. > > > > > > -- > > > Remember, it's pillage then burn. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > PDML@pdml.net > > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > -- > Bong Manayon > http://www.bong.uni.cc > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
