Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Very rare, however it is too expensive in my opinion, but it's a good lens.
Near Mint Pentax A Macro 200mm F4 Lens for Pentax K Mount from Japan 957 | eBay
http://www.ebay.com/itm/EXC-SMC-PENTAX-A-MACRO-1-4-f-4-200mm-ED-STAR-Lens-RA...0/322296591003

[rgknief60]

I don't have a Pentax 200mm macro but miss the one I had for Nikon. It sells new for under $1800 at present

I've not looked, but it might be possible to buy a used Nikon 180 macro and body for $1800 and dedicate it for that purpose. A lot cheaper than buying
the FA* or A* 200mm macros at current prices. But the Pentax 200s really do a beautiful job in the right hands.

[Blue]

I've not looked, but it might be possible to buy a used Nikon 180 macro and body for $1800 and dedicate it for that purpose. A lot cheaper than buying
the FA* or A* 200mm macros at current prices. But the Pentax 200s really do a beautiful job in the right hands.

With a Nikon body, the Tamron and Sigma 180mm macros come into play.

[WPRESTO]

I own a 200 f4 SMCA macro, purchased used sometime back in the 90's for $750. It's pretty scruffy-looking now, a fair amount of brassing and some marks on the barrel. but it would be the last lens with which I'd part. BTW: one annoying drawback when used on a modern DSLR (I originally used mine on an LX, ZX5n, and *ist); the overhanging pentaprism for holding the pop-up flash hits against the two knobs that allow rotation and removal of the tripod foot, so the camera cannot be rotated to vertical. I've sometimes used a short extension tube to overcome the limitation.

[fsge]

With a Nikon body, the Tamron and Sigma 180mm macros come into play.

Well said, apple to apple comparison does not exist but 180 f2.8 enjoys great reputation
Would this one be available in K mount, I would buy it without any hesitation and stop dreaming about FA* 200

[rgknief60]

I own a 200 f4 SMCA macro...it would be the last lens with which I'd part.

That's how I feel about the FA. First time I looked through the lens it was as if a whole other world of clarity
and detail popped out. One of my few "wow" moments with photo gear. Makes me aware of my limitations!

the camera cannot be rotated to vertical. I've sometimes used a short extension tube to overcome the limitation.

I ran into the same thing with the Pentax M42 bellows unit I have. Needs a short extension tube.

[Blue]

Well said, apple to apple comparison does not exist but 180 f2.8 enjoys great reputation
Would this one be available in K mount, I would buy it without any hesitation and stop dreaming about FA* 200

Sigma discontinued the 180mm in K-mount about 3 or 4 years ago.

[WPRESTO]

Sigma discontinued the 180mm in K-mount about 3 or 4 years ago.

I believe that Sigma never offer the current 180 f2.8 in K-mount, but did make a limited number of the older f3.5 version for Pentax. One went through buy-sell not too long ago.

[fsge]

Sigma discontinued the 180mm in K-mount about 3 or 4 years ago.

I was refering to f2.8 version with OS, not f3.5 without OS

[Blue]

I was refering to f2.8 version with OS, not f3.5 without OS

2.8 was never made in K. The OS isn't a deal breaker on Pentax bodies though due to SR. If using a tripod and focus rail, SR is should be turned off anyway. The f3.5 lens was pretty darn good for macro. I stop down a lot when shooting insects anyway.

[Digitalis]

I thought the FA 200 f4 macro was as good or better.

There are subtle differences, for instance the FOV changes a bit @ 1:1 on the FA* version due to the optical effects of IF, the FOV @ 1:1 on the A* version doesn't change quite as much. Flare is better controlled on the FA* version - but that is rather subjective. MTFs from both lenses are remarkable. The optical differences between them are, for lack of a better word: trivial, I have no issues with recommending either FA* or A* versions of the SMCP 200mm f/4 ED Macro.


Pentax K10D - Pentax SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro ISO 100 f/5.6 1/500th

the price is ridiculous for a manual focus lens that dated ~10 years

Manual focusing offers superior control for macro work especially at high magnifications, even a Nikon D4s - one of the best AF cameras in the world messes up with AF at 1:1 with the Nikon AF-S 105mm f/2.8G VR. With macro photography DOF is often so thin the margin for mistakes is too large to leave focusing to PDAF...even CDAF has issues with high magnifications.

[UncleVanya]

There are subtle differences, for instance the FOV changes a bit @ 1:1 on the FA* version due to the optical effects of IF, the FOV @ 1:1 on the A* version doesn't change quite as much. Flare is better controlled on the FA* version - but that is rather subjective. MTFs from both lenses are remarkable. The optical differences between them are, for lack of a better word: trivial, I have no issues with recommending either FA* or A* versions of the SMCP 200mm f/4 ED Macro.


Pentax K10D - Pentax SMCP-FA*200mm f/4 ED Macro ISO 100 f/5.6 1/500th



Manual focusing offers superior control for macro work especially at high magnifications, even a Nikon D4s - one of the best AF cameras in the world messes up with AF at 1:1 with the Nikon AF-S 105mm f/2.8G VR. With macro photography DOF is often so thin the margin for mistakes is too large to leave focusing to PDAF...even CDAF has issues with high magnifications.

Thanks for the input - I knew you had an informed opinion of this lens from past discussions - I wanted to hear the details from the "horses mouth" so to speak. This lens is too rich for my blood but I agree the results are impressive. I tend to use AF on macro just when I am close and then fine focus with magnified live view.

[mattb123]

Manual focusing offers superior control for macro work especially at high magnifications, even a Nikon D4s - one of the best AF cameras in the world messes up with AF at 1:1 with the Nikon AF-S 105mm f/2.8G VR. With macro photography DOF is often so thin the margin for mistakes is too large to leave focusing to PDAF...even CDAF has issues with high magnifications.

I think I made a similar comment and I agree that MF is better for macro the majority of the time but that doesn't change that AF lenses tend to cost more (all things being at least similar) than MF ones. There are always exceptions so I guess this must be one.

[Kerrowdown]

And manual focus is nothing to whine about

Don't tell me... tell that to my "Ladies".

[rgknief60]

There are subtle differences, for instance the FOV changes a bit @ 1:1 on the FA* version due to the optical effects of IF, the FOV @ 1:1 on the A* version doesn't change quite as much.

Would that make the A* slightly better for focus stacking where the focus ring is used to change the focus point?

[Not a Number]

Just out of curiosity does anybody know the price or have a price listing of these when they were new? Be interesting to adjust for inflation too.