Shel,
I'm embarrassed to say that I have not yet shot any photos with my Sigma
28/1.8 or Pentax SMC 28/2. I don't like to use a lens until I've equipped
it with a hood, a UV filter, and a lens cap that works with the hood and
filter. I've struck out with these two lenses. On each, I've fitted a B+W
thin -010 UV filter. But strangely, my 52mm Hama rectangular hood won't
slip over the Pentax's filter; the B+W filter seems to have two slight nubs
that make it wider than the HAMA, even with its cam opened. I'll have to
order the 55mm HAMA and try again.
The Sigma came without the huge tulip hood. HAMA doesn't make a 58mm
rectangular hood, so I told myself fine, I'll use the Sigma as long as I
can find a lens cap that fits over the slim filter. Sigma's snap-in cap
won't work in a slim filter, or course; neither will a Tamron, my preferred
snap-in cap. So I ordered a Schneider press-on lens cap from a mail-order
firm that specializes in filters and lens caps. In fact, I ordered two
sizes, just in case. I think one was 61.5mm, the other 63. Wouldn't you
know it: one is too small, the other too large. I'll have to find a 62 or
62.5.
The Sigma focuses smoothly, but it's definitely more plastickly and more
cheaply built than the Pentax, Kiron, or Vivitar.
I have, however, used the Vivitar Series 1 and the Kiron. The Vivitar
definitely uses a floating element for close focusing; I'm almost certain
the Kiron does, too. I've shot side-by-side identical photos, some indoor,
some out.
The Vivitar beats the Kiron in the following virtues: color saturation,
contrast, and barrel distortion. The contrast, in particular, helps details
be visible in the shadows.
The Kiron beats the Vivitar in the following virtues: compactness, light
weight, precision construction, finish, smoothness of its aperture ring,
and usefulness of its distance markings and depth-of-field scale. It may
even be a tad sharper, to judge from a razor-sharp 11-inch closeup of my
car's odometer (at f/16, the minimum for both lenses). If you're the kind
who doesn't mind tweaking a high-resolution scan in Photoshop (or a
comparable program), the Kiron's more-muted colors and more-moderate
contrast can be brought out.
Focusing on both is very smooth, but the Vivitar's helicoid travels a much
smaller art.
The view through the lens is about the same; I can't tell which one I was
peering through.
The Kiron can accept a rectangular hood; the Vivitar's front barrel
rotates; hence, HAMA hoods are out. I have yet to find a suitable hood for
the Vivitar.
Verdict? For a walking-around lens, the Kiron. For photos that yield the
more-satisfactory lab prints, the Vivitar Series 1.
-----------
> 28/1.8 Sigma APO Aspherical II (the manual-focus version; 58mm filters)
> 28/1.9 Vivitar Series 1 (floating elements, 58mm filters)
Interesting. How do you like them? How do they feel when focused?
What body(ies) do you use them with? Do you find them the equal to,
or superior, to the K28/2.0?
- --
Shel Belinkoff
Paul Franklin Stregevsky
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
W: (703) 834-4648
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
