Hi, I have a Carl Zeiss 180mm f/2.8 lens for my Contaxes. Although I've never had a 200mm prime lens of any brand, I'd say that based on my 80-200 zoom and other zooms ending at 200 or 210mm that I've had, the 180mm focal length is not different enough for the 20mm to matter.
In practical terms, if you wanted to take a full-frame photo of a subject 1.8m tall (6') then with a 180mm lens you'd have to stand 9.2m (30') away. With a 200mm lens you'd have to stand 10.2m (33.5') away. That 20mm equates to a single step forwards or backwards wrt to framing. I suppose that could be the difference between falling off a cliff and staying on the cliff, but probably only if you're Mr. Magoo. :o) --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sunday, November 11, 2001, 4:01:33 AM, you wrote: > OTOH, I feel a need for a lens between 150mm and 200mm, and between > 200mm and 300mm. Some manufacturers have such lenses, and I've even > toyed with the idea of buying another brand body just to get two or > three lenses that Pentax doesn't offer. > Leica reflex lenses are available in focal lengths of 180mm and 280mm, > as well as some other odd focal lengths. > Olympus offers two 180mm lenses, f/2.0 and 2.8, two 200mm lenses, a > 250/2.0, a 300mm, a 350mm, and a 400mm. > I suppose at least some people feel there's a value to these "odd" focal > lengths. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
