tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859750009727218885.post5139726136989706345..comments2024-02-26T05:27:42.527-08:00Comments on Making it as a Pro: Good, Fast, Cheap -- You *can* have all three!Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02132857673606682105noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859750009727218885.post-2450921168561905612011-06-06T15:04:36.794-07:002011-06-06T15:04:36.794-07:00Paul:
A few reasons. Size and weight are certain...Paul: <br />A few reasons. Size and weight are certainly a difference -- the 200 f/4 Takumar is about 3/4 the length and width of the 70-200 Canon, and about half the weight. It also has a bit more "pleasing" (entirely subjective) bokeh than the Canon. It's a bit sharper than the Canon is at 200mm (with both at f/4 -- not that surprising seeing as it's a prime). And finally, it renders colors differently than the Canon does. Don't get me wrong, I love my "L" lens...but it has a decidedly "warm" tone, while the Takumar is visibly "cooler." I'll have to post up some side-by-side comparison shots, with no color correct, so you can see :) The old lenses still give great results, and yes you Nikonians are fortunate to have more backwards compatibility...good luck with yours!<br />PaulAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02132857673606682105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1859750009727218885.post-85486403090440598552011-05-31T17:50:56.841-07:002011-05-31T17:50:56.841-07:00Wow, really timely to find this for me. thank you...Wow, really timely to find this for me. thank you for posting this. I'm currently looking at some older manual focus Nikkors as a low-cost way to add to my photographic capabilities. In Nikon-land we don't need an adapter, and we don't need to resort to stopped-down metering. On the flip-side, this means that we pay more for those old lenses. But those old lenses are so much better made, and they just feel more precise when you use them.<br /><br />I do have one question: If you have that 70-200/2.8, why are you using an old 200/4.0 manual focus? Size and weight? Less "Pro" and/or conspicuous?<br /><br />Thanks again, love your blog.<br /><br />Paul Richard Wossidlo<br />www.PaulRichardWossidlo.comPaul Wossidlohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12677277297091605699noreply@blogger.com