28-200mm f/3.8-5.6 XR Aspherical IF Macro AF
Quote from SpruceBruce on July 21, 2021, 2:20 pmI was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
I was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
Uploaded files:Quote from James Warner on July 23, 2021, 2:27 amQuote from SpruceBruce on July 21, 2021, 2:20 pmI was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
Beautiful photos. The lens does hold up fairly well on film, but I think the real credit goes to the photographer here 😉 I know how tricky these older super zooms can be. I've had a few that have surprised me though.
Quote from SpruceBruce on July 21, 2021, 2:20 pmI was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
Beautiful photos. The lens does hold up fairly well on film, but I think the real credit goes to the photographer here 😉 I know how tricky these older super zooms can be. I've had a few that have surprised me though.
Quote from Tristan Carlos on July 23, 2021, 10:57 amQuote from SpruceBruce on July 21, 2021, 2:20 pmI was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
Very nice composition, SpruceBruce! Not too bad for Kodak Gold 200 too!
Quote from SpruceBruce on July 21, 2021, 2:20 pmI was pleasantly surprised at the results for an early 2000s zoom lens. I was expecting a soft and mediocre photos. These were shot on the K1000 with Kodak Gold 200, during May. It's currently at home on my newly acquired MZ-S, proving to be a good reliable AF workhorse through it's first roll. I'd say the speed at which it focus is typical of early digital lenses when DSLRs and film were in the transition stage, sufficient to do it's job but alot to be desired by modern standards.
Very nice composition, SpruceBruce! Not too bad for Kodak Gold 200 too!