[seacapt]

Hi I just bought a package to get an A50/f1.7 . With the group of lenses is a Cosmicar 70-200 f4 zoom that looks like it's new. Never heard of this manufacturer and assume it's not the best quality but figured I'd ask. Does anyone have experience with or opinions on this lens?

[Ratmagiclady]

Hi I just bought a package to get an A50/f1.7 . With the group of lenses is a Cosmicar 70-200 f4 zoom that looks like it's new. Never heard of this manufacturer and assume it's not the best quality but figured I'd ask. Does anyone have experience with or opinions on this lens?

I dunno, but I'd been tempted to get an 'MC Cosmicar' 28, just cause it's not just a lens, it's a pretty cool hip hop name. I guess they run about to 80's Cosina quality.

Since you have it, anyway, you may as well find out for yourself how much you like it. Makers usually don't deliberately set out to make lame lenses: you could possibly have something nice, even if the name isn't one people swear by.

[seacapt]

i dunno, but i'd been tempted to get an 'mc cosmicar' 28, just cause it's not just a lens, it's a pretty cool hip hop name. I guess they run about to 80's cosina quality.

Since you have it, anyway, you may as well find out for yourself how much you like it. Makers usually don't deliberately set out to make lame lenses: You could possibly have something nice, even if the name isn't one people swear by.

i like the way you think!

[Just1MoreDave]

This lens was sold with several brands: Pentax, Takumar, Cosmicar, CPC and probably more. It is from a period when Pentax marketing was run by complete wackos. "Hey, let's take brands built on quality and industry domination in lens coatings, and put them on cheap single-coated lenses built by third-party manufacturers!" Apparently no one ever considered that they were cheapening their own brand.

Here's a link to a review here - photo of the Pentax, review of the Cosmicar:

Pentax Lens Review Database - 70-200mm F4

I have the Takumar-A version, which I've used with my fim camera for about 20 years. It has always had a very low-effort to the focus and zoom control, like manual focus with an AF lens. It's a completely different feel than any other MF lens I've used. It gets very soft at f4 and 200mm - the review says you might not notice at small prints, but I often noticed this at 4x6 on film. Here is one of my early shots on digital at 200mm, f4, 1/180 but welll braced, seems like I focused a bit in front of my target:



At f5.6 or better, or backed off a bit from 200mm, sharpness improves a lot. It has a "macro" close focusing ability at 200mm, which I never used until 3 days ago and is typical of an 80s consumer zoom - the kit lens has better close focus ability. It has a nice 9-bladed aperture. It's pretty big - the Pentax-F 70-210 is 2/3 the length - and uses 58mm filters. It's well built - mine had been dragged everywhere until 2005 and still looks and works like new.

My comments may seem a bit negative. It's one of the few lenses I have that I have used long enough to know its weaknesses that bother me. I still have a sentimental attachment to the lens. I wouldn't pay a lot for one today.