Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-28-2010, 12:24 PM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cluj Napoca
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7
Pentax SMC A 70-210mm f4 Vs SMC M 200mm F4 at 200mm

I have Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm f4. How is smc-m 200mm f4 compared to 70-210 at 200mm bouth wide open. Is it worth getting the prime? or there's not much of a difference?

08-28-2010, 12:34 PM   #2
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
QuoteOriginally posted by sim Quote
I have Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm f4. How is smc-m 200mm f4 compared to 70-210 at 200mm bouth wide open. Is it worth getting the prime? or there's not much of a difference?
Since those are older lenses, I would wager that the prime would be sharper.

Now would it be significantly sharper? Likely not enough to make a difference... but I have not directly tested either of those lenses.

In my experience, using M glass in telephoto with stop down metering can be very frustrating, because light changes dramatically at that focal length if you are tracking an animal, for example.

Unless you really need IQ, and are very good with stop down metering, I'd bet you would get better pictures with the zoom, overall.
08-28-2010, 04:07 PM   #3
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
If you look at the lens reviews for the M200/4 and the A70-200/4 you'll see that the prime rates a little higher than the zoom. I'll let you judge the opinions on their optical qualities. I have and like the zoom, but my 200/4 prime is the Super Takumar (screwmount) version that rates even higher, and is optically unlike the M-version. And that Super-Tak is fine... but what I *really* like is my cheap small sharp Tele-Takumar 200/5.6. But I digress. Those who reviewed the M200/4 seem to really like it. And it does weigh considerably less than the zoom, 405g vs 680g. I'd say that if it's under US$50, GO FOR IT!!
08-28-2010, 04:20 PM   #4
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 42,347
If I were you, I would go for the A 70-210mm just because it's going to be much easier to meter with. True, it might be a little bit softer than the prime (although I've used the 70-210mm extensively and can only say good things about it), but it'll give auto metering as well as a handy zoom range and a macro function.


Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

08-28-2010, 07:58 PM   #5
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by sim Quote
I have Pentax SMC-A 70-210mm f4.
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
If I were you, I would go for the A 70-210mm just because it's going to be much easier to meter with.
Adam, sim already HAS the A70-210. The question is, is the M200 noticeably better at 200/4? Since the truism holds that zooms do worst at their extremes, that's a valid question. The prime is definitely much lighter-weight. Whether ease-of-use is important, is up to sim. Does anyone here have shots comparing these lenses at 200/4?
08-28-2010, 08:38 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NYC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by RioRico Quote
If you look at the lens reviews for the M200/4 and the A70-200/4 you'll see that the prime rates a little higher than the zoom. I'll let you judge the opinions on their optical qualities. I have and like the zoom, but my 200/4 prime is the Super Takumar (screwmount) version that rates even higher, and is optically unlike the M-version. And that Super-Tak is fine... but what I *really* like is my cheap small sharp Tele-Takumar 200/5.6. But I digress. Those who reviewed the M200/4 seem to really like it. And it does weigh considerably less than the zoom, 405g vs 680g. I'd say that if it's under US$50, GO FOR IT!!
The A70-210's lower rating is mostly due to its nasty zoom creep. I've had both lenses at one point and the M200 really was not that impressive, it wasn't noticeably sharper than the A70-210. The m200 was noticeably smaller, lighter and had a built in lens hood. The A70-210 is much more useful.

I honestly wouldn't bother with the M200 if you already have the focal range covered.
08-29-2010, 02:58 AM   #7
sim
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cluj Napoca
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7
Original Poster
thanks for you're answers. I think I'll pass on the 200M offer!
08-29-2010, 06:09 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Ex Finn.'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Southern Maryland.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,194
"and had a built in lens hood.".
As does the A 70-210.

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, 70-210mm, f4, k-mount, pentax, pentax lens, pentax smc, slr lens, smc, smc a 70-210mm, smc m 200mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:41 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top