Igor, I used to own the manual focus version (with "A", ha ha) of the 2.8 and now have the AF version. And I also have the Tokina AT-X 80-400/4.5-5.6, which is also an AF lens.
The 80-200 AF is notably smaller then the manual focus version. Optically, I liked the manual focus version better. But both are excellent. The mechanical feel of the two is a toss-up. The MF version is easier to get my hand around, but the AF version, being a little smaller, is easier to hold in general. Everything I've heard about the recent Sigma offerings has been positive. They needed, badly, to put out some good stuff to rebuild their reputation. The 80-400 is easy to handle. It get's soft when past about 380mm. And like everything else Tokina, stop down the aperture one stop for maximum sharpness. It's a fine lens. One showing significant outside wear went for a bargain price on eBay last week. I hope some PDMLer got it. The 80-400 is a little difficult to use with AF in low light or out around 400mm. So use it MF and you're fine. The 80-400 AF is faster on the DS than the 80-200/2.8 AF response. I wonder if Pentax needs to add some dynamic adjustment to light sensitivity or contrast level to the AF system. The 80-200 is great, but does tend to hunt a bit. The 80-400 didn't hunt much at all. The older 80-400 has no tripod collar. The new "II" version does. With any of these lenses, that's important. Since we don't have anything resembling IS yet. But alas. And all of your options are $ < (Pentax / 2). Whatever you get, they all produce excellent images. Don't worry about that side. Just get one and shoot. You'll be happy. Collin KC8TKA -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .
