Thanks John, that is really the essence of my question. As I indicated before, I was wondering how the 50-200 compared to the F70-210 (I had not paid much attention to any 50-200 discussions in the past due to the fact I didn't need anything in the range). I was trying to get a feel for design and build quality. I've since found some more comments regarding this lens, and all reports seem to be positive.
thanx dk On 8/22/05, John Francis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:29:44PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > On Aug 22, 2005, at 5:43 AM, Dave Kennedy wrote: > > > > >I guess a more generic question is : > > >Is the DA50-200 designed to complement the 16-45 or the 18-55? > > >Price-wise it looks like the 18-55, but I'm wondering in terms of > > >performance. > > > > I don't quite understand the question. If the lens performs well ... > > what others who have it have reported, it does... what difference > > does its price relationship with the 16-45 or 18-55 make? It's a fair > > price for a modest speed lens of this focal length range. > > The Pentax lens road map suggest there may be two 50-200 lenses > in the pipeline. I (and others) guess that if that is the case > the current 50-200 is a good companion for the 18-55, and a more > expensive (constant aperture?) partner for the 16-45 comes later. > >
