Da* 200 f2.8

cwood · 04-28-2009, 10:33 AM

Although this lens received rave reviews when it first came out it seems to have attracted little attention since then. I picked it up a while ago and figured I'd revive some thoughts on this lens.

Size wise this is a very manageable lens - it is almost identical in size to the 50-135 zoom lens. Compared to a Canon 70-200 zoom it is significantly smaller although it is slightly heavier than the 200mm prime by Canon. For those of us who do not enjoy lugging massive lenses around the compact size of the Pentax APS-C designed lenses is a joy.

DA* 50-135 F2.8 = 136mm, 765g
DA* 200 F2.8 = 134mm, 825g
Canon 70-200 F2.8 (non-IS) = 194mm 1310g
Canon 200mm F2.8 = 136mm, 765g

For me this lens fills its purpose perfectly. It is small, fast (f2.8) and produces amazing images. When I look at my metadata for my photographs from the past 4 months (24,000 images) the vast majority of them (18,000) were taken at apertures wider than F4. This lens is exceptional from F2.8-F4 (I actually have not shot it above F4 yet).

F4

F2.8 - This is why I shoot wide apertures so often. This is a much cleaner picture than the F4 shot because of the blurred background

DA*200mm + Tamron 1.4x (= F5.6 even though EXIF says F4)

100%Crop

Last edited by cwood; 04-29-2009 at 08:08 AM.

legacyb4 · 04-28-2009, 10:58 AM

I'd love to see more pics from both the DA* 200mm and DA* 300mm to get a feel for what both are capable of.

Thanks for posting.

K100Dave · 04-28-2009, 09:44 PM

I did not need to see those pictures! LBA is making it's usual pass at my wallet again

roentarre · 04-28-2009, 11:49 PM

This lens is amazing. Just the premium pricing scares me a little

mcjm78 · 04-28-2009, 11:57 PM

I always feel like getting this lens too....but already got the Tamron 70-200mm..... IQ vs flexibility..... too hard....

ftpaddict · 04-29-2009, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by kunik

For those of us who do not enjoy lugging massive lenses around the compact size of the Pentax APS-C designed lenses is a joy.

The lens' design was based on its FA predecessor; hence it will cover the entire film plane (an FF lens, if you will). The size is purely the merit of the engineer.

pcarfan · 04-29-2009, 04:35 AM

Originally posted by K100Dave

I did not need to see those pictures! LBA is making it's usual pass at my wallet again

Me too

cwood · 04-29-2009, 07:38 AM

Originally posted by ftpaddict

The lens' design was based on its FA predecessor; hence it will cover the entire film plane (an FF lens, if you will). The size is purely the merit of the engineer.

I didn't know that... that's interesting. It helps explain why it's a few grams heavier than the Canon. Still, I'm glad to not be carrying around a 70-200 zoom that weighs in at around 3lb.

cooldude14es · 04-29-2009, 10:16 AM

I love my FA* 200mm f2.8...

rburgoss · 04-29-2009, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by cooldude14es

I love my FA* 200mm f2.8...

Ditto....

Some examples:

and this one at PPG PENTAX Photo Gallery

Venturi · 04-29-2009, 10:50 AM

Is it rational to be in love (lust) with a lens I don't yet own?

Urkeldaedalus · 04-29-2009, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by Venturi

Is it rational to be in love (lust) with a lens I don't yet own?

What does rationallity have to do with love (or lust)?

redpigeons · 04-29-2009, 01:01 PM

how hard is it to shoot with this lens with out a tripod ?

I love what I see from this lens!!!!

Venturi · 04-29-2009, 01:12 PM

deleted. wrong thread.

cwood · 04-29-2009, 01:40 PM

Originally posted by redpigeons

how hard is it to shoot with this lens with out a tripod ?

I love what I see from this lens!!!!

Its almost the exact same size as the 50-135, and its too small for a tripod collar. I'm not much of a tripod shooter in the first place but it would take pretty extraordinary circumstances before I decided to mount this on a tripod and lose the flexibility of being able to take a greater variety of pictures

04-28-2009, 10:33 AM	#1
cwood Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: California Posts: 851	*DA 200mm F2.8** Although this lens received rave reviews when it first came out it seems to have attracted little attention since then. I picked it up a while ago and figured I'd revive some thoughts on this lens. Size wise this is a very manageable lens - it is almost identical in size to the 50-135 zoom lens. Compared to a Canon 70-200 zoom it is significantly smaller although it is slightly heavier than the 200mm prime by Canon. For those of us who do not enjoy lugging massive lenses around the compact size of the Pentax APS-C designed lenses is a joy. DA* 50-135 F2.8 = 136mm, 765g DA* 200 F2.8 = 134mm, 825g Canon 70-200 F2.8 (non-IS) = 194mm 1310g Canon 200mm F2.8 = 136mm, 765g For me this lens fills its purpose perfectly. It is small, fast (f2.8) and produces amazing images. When I look at my metadata for my photographs from the past 4 months (24,000 images) the vast majority of them (18,000) were taken at apertures wider than F4. This lens is exceptional from F2.8-F4 (I actually have not shot it above F4 yet). F4 F2.8 - This is why I shoot wide apertures so often. This is a much cleaner picture than the F4 shot because of the blurred background DA200mm + Tamron 1.4x (= F5.6 even though EXIF says F4) 100%Crop Last edited by cwood; 04-29-2009 at 08:08 AM.*

04-29-2009, 01:12 PM	#14
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	deleted. wrong thread. Last edited by Venturi; 04-29-2009 at 01:13 PM. Reason: dang firefox!

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Tokina 80-200/2.8 KA; K 135/2.5; M 200/4; Tamron 70-150/2.8 soft	thomasxie	Sold Items	6	02-26-2010 11:08 AM
For Sale - Sold: M42 lenses (Takumar 200 3.5, Pentacon/Zeiss 135 2.8 and Vivitar 200 3.5)	Skorzen	Sold Items	1	06-10-2008 03:23 PM
For Sale - Sold: M 50/f1.4, Takumar 135/f2.5, Super Tak 28/f3.5, Tokina 80-200/f2.8, M 80-200/f	loudbay	Sold Items	11	03-07-2008 04:53 PM

04-28-2009, 10:58 AM	#2
legacyb4 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Tri-Cities, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,784	I'd love to see more pics from both the DA* 200mm and DA* 300mm to get a feel for what both are capable of. Thanks for posting.

04-28-2009, 09:44 PM	#3
K100Dave Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 111	I did not need to see those pictures! LBA is making it's usual pass at my wallet again

04-28-2009, 11:49 PM	#4
roentarre Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Melbourne, Australia Posts: 11,783	This lens is amazing. Just the premium pricing scares me a little

04-28-2009, 11:57 PM	#5
mcjm78 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Perth, Australia Posts: 268	I always feel like getting this lens too....but already got the Tamron 70-200mm..... IQ vs flexibility..... too hard....

04-29-2009, 12:33 AM	#6
ftpaddict Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Yurp Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,666	Originally posted by kunik For those of us who do not enjoy lugging massive lenses around the compact size of the Pentax APS-C designed lenses is a joy. The lens' design was based on its FA predecessor; hence it will cover the entire film plane (an FF lens, if you will). The size is purely the merit of the engineer.

04-29-2009, 04:35 AM	#7
pcarfan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Dayton, Ohio Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,978	Originally posted by K100Dave I did not need to see those pictures! LBA is making it's usual pass at my wallet again Me too

04-29-2009, 07:38 AM	#8
cwood Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: California Posts: 851 Original Poster	Originally posted by ftpaddict The lens' design was based on its FA predecessor; hence it will cover the entire film plane (an FF lens, if you will). The size is purely the merit of the engineer. I didn't know that... that's interesting. It helps explain why it's a few grams heavier than the Canon. Still, I'm glad to not be carrying around a 70-200 zoom that weighs in at around 3lb.

04-29-2009, 10:16 AM	#9
cooldude14es Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Barcelona, Spain Posts: 264	I love my FA* 200mm f2.8...

04-29-2009, 10:39 AM	#10
rburgoss Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: San Jose, Costa Rica Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 972	Originally posted by cooldude14es I love my FA* 200mm f2.8... Ditto.... Some examples: and this one at PPG PENTAX Photo Gallery

04-29-2009, 10:50 AM	#11
Venturi Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Tulsa, OK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,636	Is it rational to be in love (lust) with a lens I don't yet own?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-29-2009, 11:37 AM	#12
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	Originally posted by Venturi Is it rational to be in love (lust) with a lens I don't yet own? What does rationallity have to do with love (or lust)?

04-29-2009, 01:01 PM	#13
redpigeons Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: NYC Posts: 943	how hard is it to shoot with this lens with out a tripod ? I love what I see from this lens!!!!

04-29-2009, 01:40 PM	#15
cwood Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: California Posts: 851 Original Poster	Originally posted by redpigeons how hard is it to shoot with this lens with out a tripod ? I love what I see from this lens!!!! Its almost the exact same size as the 50-135, and its too small for a tripod collar. I'm not much of a tripod shooter in the first place but it would take pretty extraordinary circumstances before I decided to mount this on a tripod and lose the flexibility of being able to take a greater variety of pictures