Since the 70-210 sells USED for nearly the NEW cost of a DA 50-200, the 
DA's used cost is likewise much lower than the 70-210 A.

-Adam


J. C. O'Connell wrote:
> if the 70-210/4.0 A lens, which is no longer avail new,
> sells for "nearly" the price, (LESS) than the new 50-200,
> the 50-200 is NOT a "far less expensive lens" than the 70-210/A lens,
> it not even less expensive at all than the 70-210/A, it's MORE
> expensive.
> 
> jco
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Adam Maas
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 7:13 PM
> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> Subject: Re: The DA 50~200
> 
> 
> The SMC-A 70-210 f4 typically sells used for nearly the price of a new 
> 50-200 DA, the latter is a far less expensive lens, and pretty much a 
> match in performance (apart from the variable aperture).
> 
> -Adam
> 
> J. C. O'Connell wrote:
>> why not? those lenses were never expensive
>> and a APS version would be less costly to
>> make than a FF version of same quality or
>> better quality for same cost of the FF version.
>> jco
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
>> Of Thibouille
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 5:09 PM
>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> Subject: Re: The DA 50~200
>>
>>
>> yeah and sell it for the price they sell this 50-200 ? LOL
>>
>> 2007/3/14, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>> Jeez, you would think they could at least do
>>> F4 constant in the reduced APS format like they have
>>> done in the past on FF 35mm format many times.
>>> jco
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf
>>> Of Bruce Dayton
>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:33 PM
>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> Subject: Re: The DA 50~200
>>>
>>>
>>> I have resisted buying it so far.  I would prefer a better build
>>> quality and a faster (constant) lens.  It appears to be very good for
> 
>>> the price. My take is optical quality is better than expected for the
> 
>>> price point, but build quality is consumer level.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Bruce
>>>
>>>
>>> Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 9:09:54 AM, you wrote:
>>>
>>> SB> Is the 50-200 supposed to be a "consumer" zoom - i.e., designed
>>> SB> more
>>>
>>> SB> to a price point than the highest quality image?  For those who
>>> SB> use the lens, are you pleased with it.  Paul, and a few others, 
>>> SB> seem to be quite happy with theirs, but what about those of you 
>>> SB> who don't often comment on such things?
>>>
>>>
>>> SB> Shel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>
>>
> 
> 


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Reply via email to