"Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I use the SMC Pentax-F 4-5.6/70-210mm a lot. >But it's often too slow. >The FA 2.8 Pentax 80-200mm is almost three times as expensive as a similar >Sigma lens. >A Tokina 2.8 AT-X 80-200mm is only appr. 50% of the Sigma. This makes the >Pentax lens is 6 times as expensive as the Tokina! >Is it really worth this it?
The Pentax 80-200/2.8 is sharp at all apertures and focal lengths and works well even at close focusing distances (it's very good with an extension tube or two-element close-up diopter). Great bokeh, too. Yes, it's worth it. Of course, here in the states it's about $1300, vs $700 for the Sigma. If you can't afford the Pentax the Sigma will probably serve well. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
