> Not very long ago, someone posted a very nice shot (brown/yellow leaves) > made with this lens. About the same time someone posted a messaage saying > a lens like this was auctioned for a rather large price. I guess we were > making jokes about the "unfortunate" buyer. What is it with this lens? Is > it good, bad or average? I thought "the leaves" looked excellent!
1. I once had an A* 200/2.8 and a K 200/2.5 at the same time (I had the A* 200/2.8 first and I stumbled into a mint K 200/2.5 later on). I sold the A* 200/2.8. I kept the K 200/2.5. 2. The K 200/2.5 is one of only two Pentax SMC K (pre-A) lenses (the other being the sweet SMC K 135/2.5) that I plan on keeping for use, along with a bunch of A lenses and a few F and FA lenses, on my new DS. 3. The above three lenses (K 135/2.5, K 200/2.5, and A* 200/2.8) are the only three Pentax lenses that have the exact same basic optical design (according to lens element diagrams). It was an excellent design. I'd say that the "unfortunate" buyer would have been "unfortunate" only if he/she paid far too much for the lens or if the lens was defective. In any event, ~I~ consider myself very ~fortunate~ to have a K 200/2.5. It's a superb lens. Fred
