in particular, I am wondering about two lenses: the Super-Multi-Coated
Takumar 200mm f/4 and the SMC-M Pentax 200mm f/4. I own the Takumar, and
a very good and clean one bought from a friend some time ago. I do like
this lens, sharper than others in that range but somewhat less contrasty
than I'd like. yesterday I've been offered a supposedly good copy of the
SMC-M 200mm/4, in exchange for my Tak, some small cash adjustment
possible.
I used one of those long ago, and from Boz's site I confirmed the M is
quite smaller and lighter than the SMC Tak. main advantage for me would
be the release of the Tak's M42 adapter - I am one short right now -
with size and weight smaller bonuses. but I'd rather keep the sharpest
of them above all other considerations. I'll be seeing the M in a few
days, to get a proper idea of its condition, but would like to know from
you folks wich would be better. From Fred's site I got one praise for
the SMC-M, but I would really like to read from anyone with hands-on on
both, if possible, or at least a sample shot from the SMC-M so I can
understand better my options. sadly, I don't think I'll be able to
perform a full comparison before the deal - just a couple of shots to
ensure the SMC-M is working good, and the other interested will probably
do the same with my Takumar.
so, what do you think about those lenses? wich should I choose, if both
are perfect? thanks in advance!
lf
--
luiz felipe
luiz.felipe at luizfelipe.fot.br
--
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.
