Hi Paul, I haven`t noticed the lackluster colors in my 200/3 K mount, here are some examples: http://pug.komkon.org/02mar/greg.html http://stevelarson.0catch.com/Photography/Sunrise%20in%20Backyard.jpg I think the colors are quite nice, I`ve shot flowers with it too. I`m not being defensive, just putting up samples. Steve Larson Redondo Beach, California "Everyone has a photographic memory. Some just don't have film."
Paul Franklin Stregevsky wrote: > > Fred wrote: > However, I still don't have a K VS1 200/3. > Steve replied: > > You should try one, they`re nice. > Fred wrote: I'm trying, Steve, I'm trying - I just haven't come up with one > of 'em > yet, that's all - <g>. > > If it's basically a "stretched out" version of the VS1 135/2.3, then > > it ought to be darned good. ;-) > > Well, I've finally found a lens about which to differ with the other two > members of the Series One troika. I owned the 200/3 in M42. I was never as > happy with the results as I was with my 135/2.3. The bokeh was great, but > the lackluster colors reminded me of my Kiron 28/2. I continue to own the > Pentax SMC 200/2.5K, which I feel beats the Vivitar hands-down (except in > close focus) at all apertures at which I've tried them both. > > In fairness, I may not have tested the Vivitar under ideal conditions. I > think I was still shooting indoor school plays with a monopod (not yet a > tripod) and hadn't yet bought a release cable or a body with less vibration > than the Super Program. > > If you want a lens that combines the Vivitar's 1.2-meter close focus, the > Pentax's speed, and sharpness that's at least as good as either, you want > the Tamron SP 180/2.5--about $400 to $550. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
