nice! pity there no true macro photos like on Mark Cassino. If you like macro look here: http://www.grochowalski.pl click English version Alek PS My friend's web site
Użytkownik Vick, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >the "macro" shots on this page were done with the FA200 >http://www.blueplanetmedia.com/photo.htm >Jason > > >-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 11:45 AM >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ > > >Thank you! >You are lucky man to have such a lens. It must be one if not the best in this focal >range or any macro lens. >Do you have any picture from it on website? >Alek >Użytkownik Vick, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>For a comparison of the elements see: >>http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-i.jpg >>and >>http://kmp.bdimitrov.de/lenses/primes/_optics/200f4-Macro-ii.gif >> >>The internal focus on the FA200 is invaluable for macro work. >>Plus, the FA is RAZOR sharp at all apertures and even sharper in the f/8 to f/32 >range - sharper than the A200. The A200 is very good in the f/8 to f/22 range but >not as sharp as the FA200. >>The FA200 has 9 Aperture Blades vs. the 8 on the A200. >>This I think leads to a "softer" bokeh on the FA200. >>Jason >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 10:53 AM >>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>Subject: Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ >> >> >>Hi, >>But is there any optical difference between A and FA for macro work?Sharpness, bokeh >etc?Also FA is better? >>Alek >>Użytkownik Vick, Jason <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>>I don\\\\\\\'t have any direct comparison with Cannon or Nikon, but have used both >the FA200 ED Macro and the A200 ED Macro. >>>The FA200 (IF) is AWESOME - I can find no faults with it, razor sharp, excellent >bokeh, I like the Internal Focus and the focus limiter provides excellent and quick >focusing. >>>The A200 is a very good lens but not quite as sharp as the FA200 at the extremes. >>>Jason >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >>>Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 AM >>>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Overexposure of PZ1+ >>> >>> >>>Hi, >>>So FA 200 macro must be much better than C/N counterparts. >>>Do you have both?What is the price of A version if appears. >>>BTW Do you have FA35/2.0?any comments... >>>Thank you >>>Alek >>>Użytkownik Pĺl Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> napisał: >>>>Alek wrote: >>>> >>>>> But with K and M lenses you could not use matrix... just central or spot >>>> >>>>and??????? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Do you have Pentax FA 200/4 ED macro lens? Or A200/4 ED macro? >>>>> If so which is better? >>>> >>>>If pressed I think the FA* is slightly better but significantly larger and heavier. >>>> >>>>>What about competition in this range-Nikon/Canon/Sigma?ANy comments... >>>> >>>> >>>>According to the only test I\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\'ve seen on the 200 macro lenses the A* >200/4 macro beats the Nikon and Canon counterparts. >>>> >>>>Pĺl >>>> >>> >>> >>>--------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- >>> >>>OnetPoczta: duża, szybka, bezpieczna! >>>http://poczta.onet.pl/oferta/ >>> >>--------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- >> >> >>Hotele - rezerwuj do 40% TANIEJ! >>http://noclegi.onet.pl >> >--------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- > > >Tanie bilety lotnicze! >http://samoloty.onet.pl > --------------r-e-k-l-a-m-a----------------- Tanie bilety lotnicze! http://samoloty.onet.pl
