DA*200 review

**mikesbike** · 09-10-2021, 09:17 PM

I love mine, have had it for some years now after buying it new. Not wanting the size and weight of the DFA 70-200mm f/2.8, I instead opted for the DA* 50-135mm plus the DA* 200mm f/2.8 so at no time having to have a very large and very weighty 4 lb. lens on camera. For me this concept works very well. Of course I was then shooting only APS-C, and this was before the arrival of the K-1, but I still reasoned if FF came and I went for it, I would likely be using shorter lenses on it anyway and reserve tele shooting for APS-C. And now that I have both my KP and K-1 II, that is indeed the case.

Since this DA* lens is actually a FF design, if I should ever want a quality 200mm tele shot from my K-1 II and/or its f/2.8 aperture, It will still be there and capable, yet still compact for the purpose. I still have not done so, but I have no doubt it would provide very fine results. I could also use my old Tamron AF 1.4x TC with it if I need more reach without adding significant size.

Billking · 09-10-2021, 11:05 PM - **1 Like**

I have had the DA 200mm forever. It was admittedly my least favourite lens until I moved to FF with the K1. Now I love it.

I have just added another 10/10 review so the average will be creeping up.

**Serkevan** · 09-11-2021, 12:28 AM

Originally posted by StigVidar

But it affects the average rating and it is not good if one is going to sell such a lens. I think buyers are using this database to evaluate lenses.

I have used the database to evaluate like 6 lenses before buying. Never have I looked at the averaged score - I am fairly sure that what I would call an "eight out of ten" is not what other people would call an eight out of ten. There are also reviews made on crop cameras that don't necessarily apply to FF, or overly glowing "This is fantastic" reviews (in contrast to the overly gloomy ones like the one you mention).

I look at specific reviews that are well-written and go from there... Like Norm says, if there aren't pictures demonstrating your points, the review is critically lacking and I don't even look at it in depth. In the couple reviews I made I tried to be thorough and add a good bunch of images taken with the lens in question.

Spock · 09-11-2021, 01:45 AM

I had a DA*200 and I agree it does have some purple fringing - so to point that out is okay. I sold mine when I got an FA*80-200 after comparing them back to back. Since then I also managed to obtain a F*300 - and in my opinion both lenses perform better optically than the DA*200 - but I certainly don't think it deserves a '1' rating. I'd give it an 8. (I'd give the FA* 9, and the F* 10).

**Rondec** · 09-11-2021, 02:57 AM - **1 Like**

I don't know. A lot of people have given the DA *200 a 10, which is fine too, but that would indicate that it is a perfect lens, which it isn't. It's a bit slow to focus and it has purple fringing. A 1 is not a correct number, but as the overall score of the DA *200 is still over 9, I don't think that affects people's overall perception very much -- there are still a lot more 10s than 1s in the reviews.

(I think people are too quick to give out 10s. Even excellent lenses probably should come in at an 8 or 9).

normhead · 09-11-2021, 05:59 AM - **5 Likes**

Do some of you have lenses that never purple fringe? I'd rate my DA*200 9.21 given a choice. Not because of it's problems but because of the images I get with it.

These are all backlit fringing type situations and there's no fringing.

With the F 1.7x AF TC. Anyone who knows the 1.7 knows if your lens fringes, it will be magnified 1.7 x and yet...

So, it's annoying hearing people say "the lens fringes". It doesn't, more than most other lenses. Sometimes it fringes. Does every other lens sometimes fringe? Yes they do. And you can see it in the above image along the tree branch. Does it ruin the image? Not in this instance. Would another lens have been better? That's an untestable theory.

I have lenses I won't use in high contrast situations because of purple fringing, like my F 70-210, I don't put the DA*200 in the same category.

In a lower contrast situation, still with the fringing magnified by a TC, but this time the 1.4 with HD coatings and a different angle to the light, no fringing at all.

This to me, is more about not understanding how to use the lens. It's the same as flare and ghosting with the sun in the frame. There are specific situations that create the circumstance for fringing. The phrase "it has a problem with fringing" needs clarification. If you shoot in situations where fringing is probable it may be that the fringing is more apparent than some other lenses. But if you don't shoot in those situations, it may produce superior rendering than anything else in it's focal length. That's what I suspect, but I've never seen anyone prove it. My only criteria would be how often does it fringe compared to the other telephotos I use. It may be a bit to the negative for fringing, but in the images without fringing it's rendering is top shelf. Some times you have to risk a bit to get the best image. Compared to how often I use it, this lens a monster in producing keepers.

I bought the lens as a back up to my DA*60-250 when it was out for repair. It's worked it's way into my regular line up.

Shots like this just have a quality about them I don't see from any of my other lenses. I can see the fur detail but the fur doesn't appear to be razor sharp. It looks like fur.

With any lens like this, my question is always what other lens could I use and how would it do?

You have to see the big picture.
With this lens, if everything works out, I get excellent results. Better than my DA*60-250, better than my F-70-210. Better than my DA 55-300 in it's focal length, and that's what I get from this lens. It may be that it fringes from time to time, like every other lens, but the bottom line is, despite any flaws it may have, if it's on the camera I have better chance of getting an image I like at 200mm, and that to me is the key. Not the nitpicking, the big picture.

Giving this lens a 1 is a sign of ignorance and inexperience, it's the photographer that's a 1, not the lens.. It's one of those lenses that the more you use it the more you love it. Comments from people who don't use it don't count. Poor shooting conditions are magnified. It's easy to jump to conclusions. 90% of the time you get a better image than other 200mm images I've seen.

Especially with lenses like this one, if you use it to it's strength, it's top shelf. If you don't appreciate what it's capable of it's a 1. At that point the question becomes "how good
is the user at evaluating lenses?" The fact that some users can't take a top shelf image with it is completely negated by the experience of those who do. The lens is capable. Not all photographers are. It's a wonderful lens for what it does.

Its a case of not being able to look at the positives, and the big picture, and niggling the small stuff. Fringing is an intermittent issue. Implying, or seeming to imply, the lens fringes in every situation, as seems to be the case in a lot of commentary, is an error. People need to be a lot more precise in their commentary. If yours fringes 10% of the time, say so. Don't say "it fringes". Every lens fringes, that says absolutely nothing.

Maybe what we need is a photographer rating applied to the numerical rating so the inexperienced don't effect the ratings as much. I suspect for all lenses, but more so for lenses like this one, there will be some people who just don't take to it, for whatever reason. But that's combination, part lens, part photographer. And especially with lenses like this one, people who don't shoot a lot of telephoto, the problems of shooting telephoto, tend to get blamed on the lens. Especially if it's the only telephoto they own. People who don't shoot a few other telephotos can make extremely inappropriate comments.

AfterPentax Mark II · 09-11-2021, 07:41 AM

This is how you can convince someone... The best thing is to strike out the ratings. Let people just describe what they think about a lens and how they use it and if they are comfortable with the result. It gives the added pictures a proper part in it. After all, this is a forum by and for people who like the Pentax brand. Let us not pretend to be an independent reviewer. It is, however, funny that there are already two pages with discussion about a review from 2016! We could have made quite some good pictures in the time occupied by us with this discussion.

normhead · 09-11-2021, 08:03 AM

Originally posted by AfterPentax Mark II

This is how you can convince someone... The best thing is to strike out the ratings. Let people just describe what they think about a lens and how they use it and if they are comfortable with the result. It gives the added pictures a proper part in it. After all, this is a forum by and for people who like the Pentax brand. Let us not pretend to be an independent reviewer. It is, however, funny that there are already two pages with discussion about a review from 2016! We could have made quite some good pictures in the time occupied by us with this discussion.

I beg to differ, if I'm here, it's because I have no opportunity to be out taking pictures.

**caliscouser** · 09-11-2021, 08:51 AM

A 1 rating for any product is a user who is angry and or frustrated with their purchase and wants to vent.

They had certain expectations and the product didn't meet them. We can see the review for what it is and account for it. No big deal.

As for CA, it is more inherent with the DA*200 then the DA*300. Adapt them both on a Q (which will highlight any deficiency without mercy) and you will see this clearly.

However in my limited real-world use of the DA*200, CA has been a total non-issue. Rendering is stunning as many of you have already pointed out.

**mikesbike** · 09-12-2021, 01:15 PM

Originally posted by caliscouser

However in my limited real-world use of the DA*200, CA has been a total non-issue. Rendering is stunning as many of you have already pointed out.

Me too. And great stuff, Norm! I think it fair to rank below 10 a lens that is less than absolutely perfect, but which can still enjoy a very high score. I am ok with that and see such a lens as very fine indeed. Then there is still some room for that very rare lens that bumps up against being very near absolutely perfect.

Maybe someone who gave a very uncharacteristic low rating simply got a bad copy. Or maybe they simply have a lot yet to learn about how to use their equipment. So taking these matters into consideration when dealing with such a minority opinion makes sense.

Ronald Oakes · 09-13-2021, 09:35 PM

Personally I didn't find the reviewer that rated the lens only a 1 as alarming as I did with the individual who rated the lens at a 4 and had an included image that had severe purple fringing all over it ......that alarmed me and gave me issue for concern.
What really irritates me is when some Sony fan boy gets a newfangled mirrorless camera , smacks a Pentax lens on it , does a total of three or four posts , then goes and gives several lens reviews a score of no more than 5......Never to be heard of again on PF.
I consider that egregious and unacceptable Behavior....

normhead · 09-14-2021, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Ronald Oakes

Personally I didn't find the reviewer that rated the lens only a 1 as alarming as I did with the individual who rated the lens at a 4 and had an included image that had severe purple fringing all over it ......that alarmed me and gave me issue for concern.
What really irritates me is when some Sony fan boy gets a newfangled mirrorless camera , smacks a Pentax lens on it , does a total of three or four posts , then goes and gives several lens reviews a score of no more than 5......Never to be heard of again on PF.
I consider that egregious and unacceptable Behavior....

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men....

**c.a.m** · 09-14-2021, 03:10 PM

Fortunately, for a lens having more than 30 reviews, a single high or low score doesn't profoundly affect the average user rating. I think that a review that includes only a couple of hyperbolic sentences could be easily discounted or ignored.

Unfortunately, the review in question doesn't include any sample images or further insight into the reviewer's sensitivity to, in this case, "Purple Fringing !!"

- Craig

**luftfluss** · 09-14-2021, 04:11 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men....

**mikesbike** · 09-16-2021, 07:40 PM

Yes- The Shadow knows!

Wow- is this going back a looong way!

09-11-2021, 05:59 AM - 5 Likes	#21
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Do some of you have lenses that never purple fringe? I'd rate my DA200 9.21 given a choice. Not because of it's problems but because of the images I get with it. These are all backlit fringing type situations and there's no fringing. With the F 1.7x AF TC. Anyone who knows the 1.7 knows if your lens fringes, it will be magnified 1.7 x and yet... So, it's annoying hearing people say "the lens fringes". It doesn't, more than most other lenses. Sometimes it fringes. Does every other lens sometimes fringe? Yes they do. And you can see it in the above image along the tree branch. Does it ruin the image? Not in this instance. Would another lens have been better? That's an untestable theory. I have lenses I won't use in high contrast situations because of purple fringing, like my F 70-210, I don't put the DA200 in the same category. In a lower contrast situation, still with the fringing magnified by a TC, but this time the 1.4 with HD coatings and a different angle to the light, no fringing at all. This to me, is more about not understanding how to use the lens. It's the same as flare and ghosting with the sun in the frame. There are specific situations that create the circumstance for fringing. The phrase "it has a problem with fringing" needs clarification. If you shoot in situations where fringing is probable it may be that the fringing is more apparent than some other lenses. But if you don't shoot in those situations, it may produce superior rendering than anything else in it's focal length. That's what I suspect, but I've never seen anyone prove it. My only criteria would be how often does it fringe compared to the other telephotos I use. It may be a bit to the negative for fringing, but in the images without fringing it's rendering is top shelf. Some times you have to risk a bit to get the best image. Compared to how often I use it, this lens a monster in producing keepers. I bought the lens as a back up to my DA60-250 when it was out for repair. It's worked it's way into my regular line up. Shots like this just have a quality about them I don't see from any of my other lenses. I can see the fur detail but the fur doesn't appear to be razor sharp. It looks like fur. With any lens like this, my question is always what other lens could I use and how would it do? You have to see the big picture. With this lens, if everything works out, I get excellent results. Better than my DA60-250, better than my F-70-210. Better than my DA 55-300 in it's focal length, and that's what I get from this lens. It may be that it fringes from time to time, like every other lens, but the bottom line is, despite any flaws it may have, if it's on the camera I have better chance of getting an image I like at 200mm, and that to me is the key. Not the nitpicking, the big picture. Giving this lens a 1 is a sign of ignorance and inexperience, it's the photographer that's a 1, not the lens.. It's one of those lenses that the more you use it the more you love it. Comments from people who don't use it don't count. Poor shooting conditions are magnified. It's easy to jump to conclusions. 90% of the time you get a better image than other 200mm images I've seen. Especially with lenses like this one, if you use it to it's strength, it's top shelf. If you don't appreciate what it's capable of it's a 1. At that point the question becomes "how good is the user at evaluating lenses?" The fact that some users can't take a top shelf image with it is completely negated by the experience of those who do. The lens is capable. Not all photographers are. It's a wonderful lens for what it does. Its a case of not being able to look at the positives, and the big picture, and niggling the small stuff. Fringing is an intermittent issue. Implying, or seeming to imply, the lens fringes in every situation, as seems to be the case in a lot of commentary, is an error. People need to be a lot more precise in their commentary. If yours fringes 10% of the time, say so. Don't say "it fringes". Every lens fringes, that says absolutely nothing. Maybe what we need is a photographer rating applied to the numerical rating so the inexperienced don't effect the ratings as much. I suspect for all lenses, but more so for lenses like this one, there will be some people who just don't take to it, for whatever reason. But that's combination, part lens, part photographer. And especially with lenses like this one, people who don't shoot a lot of telephoto, the problems of shooting telephoto, tend to get blamed on the lens. Especially if it's the only telephoto they own. People who don't shoot a few other telephotos can make extremely inappropriate comments. Last edited by normhead; 09-11-2021 at 07:08 AM.

09-12-2021, 01:15 PM	#25
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	Originally posted by caliscouser However in my limited real-world use of the DA200, CA has been a total non-issue. Rendering is stunning as many of you have already pointed out. Me too. And great stuff, Norm! I think it fair to rank below 10 a lens that is less than absolutely perfect, but which can still enjoy a very high score. I am ok with that and see such a lens as very fine indeed. Then there is still some room for that very rare lens that bumps up against being very near absolutely perfect. Maybe someone who gave a very uncharacteristic low rating simply got a bad copy. Or maybe they simply have a lot yet to learn about how to use their equipment. So taking these matters into consideration when dealing with such a minority opinion makes sense. Last edited by mikesbike; 09-12-2021 at 01:26 PM.*

09-13-2021, 09:35 PM	#26
Ronald Oakes Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: Virginia Posts: 1,582	Personally I didn't find the reviewer that rated the lens only a 1 as alarming as I did with the individual who rated the lens at a 4 and had an included image that had severe purple fringing all over it ......that alarmed me and gave me issue for concern. What really irritates me is when some Sony fan boy gets a newfangled mirrorless camera , smacks a Pentax lens on it , does a total of three or four posts , then goes and gives several lens reviews a score of no more than 5......Never to be heard of again on PF. I consider that egregious and unacceptable Behavior.... Last edited by Ronald Oakes; 09-13-2021 at 09:46 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: DA and HD DA Primes: DA 50 1.8, DA XS 40mm, HD DA 35mm, DA 21mm, HD DA 15mm	Amarony	Sold Items	8	02-20-2019 06:21 AM
DA200/2.8 vs FA200/2.8 in abberations	pcrichmond	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	12	06-14-2018 02:04 PM
For Sale - Sold: DA* 200, DA*50-135, M 135 3.5, DA-L 50-200, Kiron 2x TC	EstimatedEyes	Sold Items	7	05-31-2016 08:32 AM
DA* 200 vs FA* 200 vs A* 200	bollicina31	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	06-27-2011 12:15 AM

09-10-2021, 09:17 PM	#16
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	I love mine, have had it for some years now after buying it new. Not wanting the size and weight of the DFA 70-200mm f/2.8, I instead opted for the DA* 50-135mm plus the DA* 200mm f/2.8 so at no time having to have a very large and very weighty 4 lb. lens on camera. For me this concept works very well. Of course I was then shooting only APS-C, and this was before the arrival of the K-1, but I still reasoned if FF came and I went for it, I would likely be using shorter lenses on it anyway and reserve tele shooting for APS-C. And now that I have both my KP and K-1 II, that is indeed the case. Since this DA* lens is actually a FF design, if I should ever want a quality 200mm tele shot from my K-1 II and/or its f/2.8 aperture, It will still be there and capable, yet still compact for the purpose. I still have not done so, but I have no doubt it would provide very fine results. I could also use my old Tamron AF 1.4x TC with it if I need more reach without adding significant size.

09-10-2021, 11:05 PM - 1 Like	#17
Billking Forum Member Join Date: May 2021 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 72	I have had the DA 200mm forever. It was admittedly my least favourite lens until I moved to FF with the K1. Now I love it. I have just added another 10/10 review so the average will be creeping up.

09-11-2021, 12:28 AM	#18
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	Originally posted by StigVidar But it affects the average rating and it is not good if one is going to sell such a lens. I think buyers are using this database to evaluate lenses. I have used the database to evaluate like 6 lenses before buying. Never have I looked at the averaged score - I am fairly sure that what I would call an "eight out of ten" is not what other people would call an eight out of ten. There are also reviews made on crop cameras that don't necessarily apply to FF, or overly glowing "This is fantastic" reviews (in contrast to the overly gloomy ones like the one you mention). I look at specific reviews that are well-written and go from there... Like Norm says, if there aren't pictures demonstrating your points, the review is critically lacking and I don't even look at it in depth. In the couple reviews I made I tried to be thorough and add a good bunch of images taken with the lens in question.

09-11-2021, 01:45 AM	#19
Spock Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Perth, Western Australia Photos: Albums Posts: 674	I had a DA200 and I agree it does have some purple fringing - so to point that out is okay. I sold mine when I got an FA80-200 after comparing them back to back. Since then I also managed to obtain a F300 - and in my opinion both lenses perform better optically than the DA200 - but I certainly don't think it deserves a '1' rating. I'd give it an 8. (I'd give the FA* 9, and the F* 10).

09-11-2021, 02:57 AM - 1 Like	#20
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,651	I don't know. A lot of people have given the DA 200 a 10, which is fine too, but that would indicate that it is a perfect lens, which it isn't. It's a bit slow to focus and it has purple fringing. A 1 is not a correct number, but as the overall score of the DA 200 is still over 9, I don't think that affects people's overall perception very much -- there are still a lot more 10s than 1s in the reviews. (I think people are too quick to give out 10s. Even excellent lenses probably should come in at an 8 or 9).

09-11-2021, 07:41 AM	#22
AfterPentax Mark II Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2021 Posts: 1,461	This is how you can convince someone... The best thing is to strike out the ratings. Let people just describe what they think about a lens and how they use it and if they are comfortable with the result. It gives the added pictures a proper part in it. After all, this is a forum by and for people who like the Pentax brand. Let us not pretend to be an independent reviewer. It is, however, funny that there are already two pages with discussion about a review from 2016! We could have made quite some good pictures in the time occupied by us with this discussion.

09-11-2021, 08:03 AM	#23
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by AfterPentax Mark II This is how you can convince someone... The best thing is to strike out the ratings. Let people just describe what they think about a lens and how they use it and if they are comfortable with the result. It gives the added pictures a proper part in it. After all, this is a forum by and for people who like the Pentax brand. Let us not pretend to be an independent reviewer. It is, however, funny that there are already two pages with discussion about a review from 2016! We could have made quite some good pictures in the time occupied by us with this discussion. I beg to differ, if I'm here, it's because I have no opportunity to be out taking pictures.

09-11-2021, 08:51 AM	#24
caliscouser Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: SF Bay Area, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,037	A 1 rating for any product is a user who is angry and or frustrated with their purchase and wants to vent. They had certain expectations and the product didn't meet them. We can see the review for what it is and account for it. No big deal. As for CA, it is more inherent with the DA200 then the DA300. Adapt them both on a Q (which will highlight any deficiency without mercy) and you will see this clearly. However in my limited real-world use of the DA*200, CA has been a total non-issue. Rendering is stunning as many of you have already pointed out.

09-14-2021, 01:19 PM	#27
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Ronald Oakes Personally I didn't find the reviewer that rated the lens only a 1 as alarming as I did with the individual who rated the lens at a 4 and had an included image that had severe purple fringing all over it ......that alarmed me and gave me issue for concern. What really irritates me is when some Sony fan boy gets a newfangled mirrorless camera , smacks a Pentax lens on it , does a total of three or four posts , then goes and gives several lens reviews a score of no more than 5......Never to be heard of again on PF. I consider that egregious and unacceptable Behavior.... Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men....

09-14-2021, 03:10 PM	#28
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Fortunately, for a lens having more than 30 reviews, a single high or low score doesn't profoundly affect the average user rating. I think that a review that includes only a couple of hyperbolic sentences could be easily discounted or ignored. Unfortunately, the review in question doesn't include any sample images or further insight into the reviewer's sensitivity to, in this case, "Purple Fringing !!" - Craig

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

09-14-2021, 04:11 PM	#29
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,619	Originally posted by normhead Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men....

09-16-2021, 07:40 PM	#30
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	Yes- The Shadow knows! Wow- is this going back a looong way!