Funny, I have a Pentax FA 28-200mm, the film era equivalent of this type
of lens, which I've taken an awful lot of photos with, was often the
default lens that I grabbed on my way out the door, but I've never
gotten particularly attached to it. On digital it took very good photos
and, focused positively either automatically or manually. It's been
knocked around quite a bit and now exhibits what looks like a
decentering flaw, the left side is markedly less sharp than the right
side of the frame. One thing I can say is that I'm not going to go out
my way to buy another, every time I used it I suspected that I could
have gotten better quality from almost any other lens I owned. When I
thought my second F 70-210 was dying the same way the first had I
seriously started looking for a replacement, despite it's somewhat
awkward AOV on APS-C digital. and less than endearing manual focus feel.
On 6/30/2012 11:35 AM, George Sinos wrote:
Not a Pentax product, but the brand isn't the topic here. Gary Arndt
talks about replacing a lens that he's used on his world travels. The
interesting part (to me, anyway) is how long he used the lens when it
was literally falling apart.
<http://everything-everywhere.com/2012/06/30/an-ode-to-my-lens-2007-2012/>
By the way, look at the photos on his site. As he said, most of them
were taken with this one 18-200, f/3.5-5.6 lens. Reminds me that you
don't always need a particular piece of equipment to produce good
work. At $850 this is not exactly a cheap lens, but it's not
extremely expensive either.
gs
George Sinos
--------------------
[email protected]
www.georgesphotos.net
plus.georgesinos.com
--
Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a
lengthly search.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
