Well that's kind of unfair, the FA is a macro, I would expect it to be
_much_ sharper than the M, focus much more closely and cost a whale lot
more...
(whale was my spell checkers Idea, I think I like it).
William Robb wrote:
----- Original Message ----- From:
Subject: D series & 200/4 models
Has anyone as yet compared the A, M, & K
200/4 lenses on a digital body?
Are results available to view?
The M200/4 is definitely optically not as good as the FA200/4 Macro.
Not that the M is bad, the FA is just particularly good.
No examples, just my usual unscientific way of looking at pictures.
Oh yes, the FA also offers autofocus, macro focus and full metering
compatability with the istD.
William Robb
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
