F 70-210mm vs DA 50-200mm

Ive looked on review sites and they all seem to say that theyre just as good as each other, however the 70-210 is heavier.
Anyone here used both? Which do you prefer?
Im leaning towards the 70-210, mainly due to SRS having one used in stock, so its around £80 rather than the £120 I would pay for a new 50-200. Also, if I got round to purchasing an old SLR, I would be able to use the lens on that, whereas the DA I wouldnt, correct?

No.
N/A.
Yes.

The F is an excellent lens, and it seems the DA is pretty close.

G

Thanks for the opinion George

I've used both and have the SMC-DA 50-200.

SMC-F 70-210 is heavy (really dense!) and usually without a hood. Really, really could do with a hood in bright light.

SMC-DA 50-200 is not much bigger than the 18-55 kit lens. Resolution, colour and contrast are all good. Hood is supplied They were going for less than £120 (Jacobs had them for £49 at one point ).

It's quite likely that the 50-200 will work very well on film (see my pbase account for the SMC-DA 16-45 on the Z1 film camera).

To be honest, it's a tough call. I personally find 200mm a little limiting - the SMC-FA 80-320 is a nice lens all round and goes well with the SMC-FA 24-90 that I use a lot.

Hope that doesn't confuse you even more!!
Matt

I have both, the 70-210 is very very heavy and is well balanced on the SFXn that it was designed for and not so great on a dslr. It is sharp but the contrast is lacking compared to the 50-200; as has been said it benefits from a hood and the correct rubber one folds back over the lens for storage, auto-focus is much much slower than the DA lenses.

Manual focus is truly horrible on all the F lenses.

I haven't used the 70-210 ever since buying the 50-200.

Ken

Thats the kinda comment I needed
Also the fact that as you say, its heavier and needs a lens hood (more money), and the AF/MF is not as good as with DA lenses.

Thanks to all who helped, perhaps I will have the 50-200 soon, but i shall be looking out for bargains (Ive heard twice that companies have reduced the pentax/samsung versions down to below £50)

I have to say that if you can get the 50-200 for under £100 then it probably makes more sense than buying a second-hand 70-210 which will be at least 16 years old.

However, my comments were made in relation to the K10D, not the *Ist bodies, which were very light. The 70-210 is not a bad match with the K10D, which is quite heavy. And it focusses quickly with the K10D, too.

G

Yeah, that was my thinking as well
I'm going to go for the 50-200mm, im pretty sure.
Unless I find another alternative for a cheap price, and in such a case I will probably revive this thread

Look for the Samsung equivelant, often at ridiculously low prices. I got mine for £39.00 brand new.

I got a 70-210 with something else from ebay and compared it to my 50-200, and found the following:

70-210 has slightly faster AF and hunts less, it is also fractionally sharper

50-200 has higher contrast and brighter colour, and is much smaller aand lighter. It also has nicer MF feel and quick shift focusing.

I kept the 50-200 since I only carry it when I'm travelling light and the 70-210 is nearly as big and heavy as my 80-320.


In contrast, my Dad kept the 70-210 and sold his 50-200 since he prefers the image quality and focusing speed.