Hi Keith.  I'll expand a bit my commentary...

Bad construction and a lot of flare. Stay away from non-SMC lenses.

I forgot who said that, but... what is meant by "bad construction?"
This started out as a Pentax lens. I assume a Pentax design. Did they goof?
I guess we'll never know, but it seems to me that an 11 element, constant aperture lens, with an 8 leaf shutter, is not an INexpensive method of putting a lens together!
I'm sure they didn't set out to make a "cheap" lens...

Most non-SMC zooms from Pentax I have taken in my hands had a focus/zoom ring soft enough that it wouln't stay in place unless you had your lens quite horizontal. The general ring feeling was really not as good as on the old M80-200 or even the A70-210. An old K or M zoom is a pleasure to use and won't wobble even if it becomes a bit soft with time. (Well... wobble may be too strong of a word some of the times.)


The "post-M" zooms, beginning in 1984 with the "SMC 80-200 type 2" zoom which was later produced without SMC, won't hold on very well under regular use.

A new SMC A70-210, as the one I had for a year, was doing great, but I have seen used ones that were not as good mechanically as the older K and M ones, but they are still better than non-SMC zooms (which, by the way, were, generally if not always, not made in Japan).


All SMC gives you is freedom from flare and such... If you use an otherwise capable non-SMC lens in less demanding situations, you can still get excellent photographs.

Yes, but contrast will probably still be lower in most situations.

If they had made this lens with SMC coatings, would the category immediately switch to "a great lens?"

No because optical and mechanical construction are as important. The SMC-A70-210, a good lens, has non non-SMC small brother. The non-SMC A70-200, a lower quality lens, has no SMC big brother. Their quality is related to optical & mechanical construction more than SMC I think. But a good lens deserves SMC. Non-SMC lenses were aimed at low budget customers. Unfortunately you usually get what you pay for.


Andre



Reply via email to