On 11/11/04, Ronald Arvidsson, discombobulated, unleashed: >Was the 200/2.5 easier - faster to work with than the 80-200/2.8 at the >long end, or no significant difference?
I have no experience with the Pentax 80-200 2.8 - I had a Sigma 70- 200 2.8 in KA mount and a Canon 70-200 2.8 L IS. There is no perceptible difference in light level between a 2.5 and a 2.8 IMO. Or do you mean faster to work with as in speed and ease of use? Well, that L IS lens was one of the main reasons I bought into Canon. That's lightning-fast AF. As for the 200 2.5 and manual focus, it was fine. It's an impressive and quality lens. HTH Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| http://www.cottysnaps.com _____________________________
