Yep, what Peter said. I admit I don't use the M135/3.5 much (I have a few other 135s), but it is a great performer. I like the M200/4 (and it's slightly more convenient brother A200/4) a lot. Both work well on digital, and are really convenient walking-around lenses. Picked up the M135 for the pricely sum of $A100, but I've seen it cheaper. Can't remember what I paid for the M200, but it was certainly around about $A100 as well.
D P. J. Alling wrote: > Both are very good, the 200 better than the 135, but neither is > particularly rare. I'd not pay more than 65-100 dollars for either. > > Patrick Genovese wrote: > >> I've been offered the M135 f/3.5 and the M200 f/4 (price yet to be >> determined).. >> >> I''ve inspected the lenses and both are in great condition ... What''s >> their performance like and what would be a reasonable price to pay for >> them ? >> >> >> > > > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.iinet.net.au/~derbyc -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
