On 12/4/06, Doug Brewer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > This morning I came up against my lack of telephoto power, so I'm > looking at KEH for affordable options. > > I'm considering either the M200/4 or the M300/4 as possibilities, and am > fishing for opinions on them from owners/users. > > Thanks in advance. You're welcome. ;)
I've had an M200/4 for a few years. For 35mm it's too long for portrait use and too short for those times I needed a really long lens. However, since I picked up a K100D for "my wife" it's starting to see quite a bit of use. Sharpness is better than the F80-200 (I don't own anything else to compare it to). The resulting images also seem to be more pleasing to my eye - color, saturation, what have you. Granted, these are subjective, so take them with a grain or 20 of salt. The real bonus for the 200/4 is its availability. They're everywhere and they're cheap. So if you don't like it you're only out a few dollars. It's my opinion that for the money this is a very good lens. On the other hand, Tom Reese allowed me to shoot a few frames through his A300/2.8 once upon a time and there is absolutely no comparison. I understand that Tom probably paid a teeny bit more for his than I paid for mine. HTH. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com Shoot more film! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
