Junior Member Registered: October, 2023 Posts: 31 | | Review Date: December 1, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very pretty. Attracts attention. Very sharp lens | | Cons: | a bit large | | Sharpness: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax ME Super
| |
I was torn about arrying this lens because it is a bit heavy and somewhat long, even though not as bad as other 70-200mm lenses, I do have 3 other tele zooms with K or P/K mount that are shorter and lighter but I just got my first look at the results and I will be carrying this one and just deal with the weight and room taken up in my bag. 
As this image shows when set to 200mm you lose nothing in the way of sharpness. This is what makes it a joy ot shoot with.
| |
New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 14 | | Review Date: July 23, 2017 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | nice, RAZOR SHARP lens (for new edition II) | | Cons: | very few CA's in the corners at f8-11 visible | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: pentax k-5 k-x k200 k-s1 Fuji x-t100 x-e1
| |
 perhaps I've bought an item of another production line of this lens. The inscripure "MC" of my lens is white, not yellow as above to see!!! So I've got an improved version, probably!!!
***** For me a bad lens has huge CA's and enormous flare or it is impossible to get really sharp pictures with it - but absolutely nothing of these negative deviations has my lens. *****
optical design of mine: 10/7 elements
I'd got a 4.5/80-200 this should be rated wirh 8 points (strong CA's, not so sharp as this one). But this 4.5-5.6/70-210 is a quite different optical construction. And the new edition of this lens has 210mm instead of 200mm.
For a review it is necessary to control the technical specification and perhaps the housing. Now my totally different impressions (mines is much more shorter!!!):
++ excellent sharpness in the center of the picture, if stopped down a few
+ scarecely CA's in the corners (nearly not visble, only on very big magnification)
++ very good color rendition
++ high contrast
85 LP/mm = 170 white and black lines is a professional result (at f8-11 with 70 mm)
65 LP/mm = 130 " (at f 11 with 210 mm) is still very good - tested with Fuji x-T100 (24 MP)
for macro shootings with short bellows oder macro ring as well suitable: f8-11 very sharp pictures
Even BETTER CA's correction and sharpness than sigma apo 3.5-4.5/70.210  | |
Veteran Member Registered: July, 2010 Posts: 2,395 | | Review Date: July 24, 2010 | Not Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 3 |
| Pros: | Solid, Sharp for this sort of zoom | | Cons: | CA no matter what, very heavy | |
I owned this lens for a day. I traded for a Vivitar 4.5 - 5.6 70-210mm. Technically it should have been a downgrade, considering this is a C/D, but the cheapo Vivitar took better pictures!
Well, this lens is sharper, but it's also twice as heavy and has a LOT of CA. Stopping down did not help, and it was so intense that no amount of PP would get rid of it.
I don't see how this lens would have sold with such awful CA. You can find a nicer cheapo telephoto.
| |
Veteran Member Registered: January, 2008 Location: Yurp Posts: 4,666 | | Review Date: March 23, 2008 | Recommended | Price: $40.00
| Rating: 4 |
| Pros: | Cheap, enough bang for the buck | | Cons: | Slow, average optics | |
Construction is solid enough, considering it is an all-metal lens.
Contrast is good; but sharpness never goes beyond average (even when stopped down).
CA is present at all focal lengths, and the lens exhibits slight pincushion distortion at 200mm.
Good for a first lens, but you may want to upgrade to better optics soon.
| |
