Not really, because the current secondary market has at least some 70-210/A lenses available (nearly 100% USED) but there are hardly ANY 50-200/DA available except for NEW at a price higher than the 70-210/As are selling for. Your argument might make sense in the future but for right now the 50-200DA lenses are certainly not "far less expensive" to actually aquire than the 70-210A lenses are. jco
-----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Adam Maas Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 7:35 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: The DA 50~200 Since the 70-210 sells USED for nearly the NEW cost of a DA 50-200, the DA's used cost is likewise much lower than the 70-210 A. -Adam J. C. O'Connell wrote: > if the 70-210/4.0 A lens, which is no longer avail new, > sells for "nearly" the price, (LESS) than the new 50-200, > the 50-200 is NOT a "far less expensive lens" than the 70-210/A lens, > it not even less expensive at all than the 70-210/A, it's MORE > expensive. > > jco > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Adam Maas > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 7:13 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: The DA 50~200 > > > The SMC-A 70-210 f4 typically sells used for nearly the price of a new > 50-200 DA, the latter is a far less expensive lens, and pretty much a > match in performance (apart from the variable aperture). > > -Adam > > J. C. O'Connell wrote: >> why not? those lenses were never expensive >> and a APS version would be less costly to >> make than a FF version of same quality or >> better quality for same cost of the FF version. >> jco >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >> Of Thibouille >> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 5:09 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: The DA 50~200 >> >> >> yeah and sell it for the price they sell this 50-200 ? LOL >> >> 2007/3/14, J. C. O'Connell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> Jeez, you would think they could at least do >>> F4 constant in the reduced APS format like they have >>> done in the past on FF 35mm format many times. >>> jco >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf >>> Of Bruce Dayton >>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:33 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: The DA 50~200 >>> >>> >>> I have resisted buying it so far. I would prefer a better build >>> quality and a faster (constant) lens. It appears to be very good >>> for > >>> the price. My take is optical quality is better than expected for >>> the > >>> price point, but build quality is consumer level. >>> >>> -- >>> Bruce >>> >>> >>> Wednesday, March 14, 2007, 9:09:54 AM, you wrote: >>> >>> SB> Is the 50-200 supposed to be a "consumer" zoom - i.e., designed >>> SB> more >>> >>> SB> to a price point than the highest quality image? For those who >>> SB> use the lens, are you pleased with it. Paul, and a few others, >>> SB> seem to be quite happy with theirs, but what about those of you >>> SB> who don't often comment on such things? >>> >>> >>> SB> Shel >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> [email protected] >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> >> > > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
