Well, I bit the bullet and ordered one. Pick it up next Wednesday. Will check focus ASAP. Hopefully I can get something for the PUG with it...
Happy holidays all! Regards, Pete Mac in post-morning-storms Melbourne ________________ Sent from my iPad2 On 22/12/2011, at 9:05, Pete McIntosh <[email protected]> wrote: > On 22/12/2011 01:15, Dario Bonazza wrote: >> Jan van Wijk wrote: >> >>> Hmm, some room for interpretation here, do you mean this one: >>> >>> Sigma 70-200 mm f/2.8 II EX APO DG Macro HSM >>> >>> If so, no I have no experience with that one :-) >>> However, I do have a slightly older version, which did not have HSM, >>> and is not optimized for digital. >> >> Same here. >> >>> It was one of my favorite lenses on film (MZ-S), together with the matching >>> EX converters. >>> >>>> If so, what say you? >>> >>> IQ was quite good, and so was build quality. >>> I tend to use it less now, prefer the DA 50-135 for the shorter end, >>> and the Bigma (with OS and HSM) for the long end. >> >> Except for the Bigma (which I don't own), I agree with Jan and I'd go a >> little further. That Sigma is an excellent lens. Some years ago I compared >> it to the Pentax FA* 2.8/80-200 and it was not so far from it. About >> resolution and sharpness, the Pentax was a little better at center ad a >> little softer at edges. All in all, quite a tie. The real pluses of the >> Pentax were an overall better "brilliance" of the image (color balance and >> such) and, most visible , a much better control of flare and ghost. >> >> The problem with some Sigma lenses (at least those I had the occasion to >> own) is you cannot really get accurate AF: Should you tune for say 70mm, you >> have a visible error at 200, and vice-versa. The same happens (even more >> critically) with the latest Sigma DC 17-70mm OS, which I sold quickly for >> that reason. >> Back to the Sigma 70-200mm AF issue, I then decided to set perfect focus >> around 150mm, so that I get fine results 100 to 200mm, while forgetting to >> use that lens around 70-80mm. After all, I own other lenses covering such >> focal lengths. >> So now I choose which one to take with me between DA* 50-135mm and the Sigma >> 70-200mm. Nine out of ten, the Pentax suits me better for the combination of >> focal length, size and noiseless operation (needed at performances I shot). >> At outdoor concerts, I take the Sigma with me. I'd love a DA/FA* >> 2.8/70-200mm! No, the DA* 4/60-250mm is not such a lens, as I miss that >> extra stop. > Good information - many thanks. I've also looked at the 50-135, but it's > more than double the price of the 70-200 down here and, while the 50-135 is a > wonderful lens and I'd love one, I don't know if it's 2+ times as good as the > Sigma. And I don't think I could stretch my relationship with the finance > manager that far... :-) > > Regards, > > Pete Mac in Melbourne -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
