Got carried away there, it's internal zoom and very short extension focus, not really IF.
Don > -----Original Message----- > From: Don Sanderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 7:52 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: RE: FA 80-200 F4.7-5.6 or DA 50-200 > > > I have the A and the FA versions, virtually identical except > the focus ring. > The 50-200 is a better lens optically and mechanically, but > I sure love the IF and IZ of the 80-200! > > Don > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Joseph Tainter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Monday, September 26, 2005 7:45 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: FA 80-200 F4.7-5.6 or DA 50-200 > > > > > > I liked what my A 80-200 gave/gives me. Took a lot of nice, sharp > > photos.(film > > cameras > > here.Never > > tried it on the istD yet) > > > > Is the FA 80-200 pertty much the same lens. > > > > ***I believe so.*** > > > > If so, i'm looking at the vari focal zooms listed above as i spent my > > 80-200 > > f2.8 money on > > the ibook.LOL > > > > For those that own or owned the FA version, is it a decent consumer > > lens, or am > > i better > > of with the 50-200 > > > > ***I haven't compared them. The DA 50-200 runs close (not quite, but > > close) to the SMC F 70-210, so I would guess that it is > somewhat sharper > > than the old F/FA 80-200 f4.7-5.6. Still, the latter is one of > the great > > bargains out there if that is what your budget mandates. A lot > of people > > like its results on digital. It is sharp throughout the zoom > range, with > > nice color. > > > > If it was me, I would save to get the DA 50-200 if I didn't already own > > the SMC F 70-210. But if broke, the 80-200 can be had for little. > > > > Joe > > >
