On 12/22/2010 3:07 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
It's rare that f2.8 gives one too much depth of field. However, I do have an FA 50/1.4 if I need it. And unlike some of the older primes, the new zooms are actually sharp at 2.8. The DA* 16-50/2.8 is sharper at 50mm and 2.8 than is the FA 50/1.4. In terms of low light, high ISO performance makes 2.8 feasible almost anywhere. Paul
Oh, that's entirely possible. After all, I still have K-7 which lags behind K-5 in low light performance. You're right about the aperture though, that by careful work on the frame one can solve most of DOF problems.
Indeed, I find 24-60/2.8 practically ideal for my style of shooting - moderate wide to portrait tele. Sharpness wide open is still less than my FA limited primes at f/2.8 but acceptable nonetheless. No issues with color fidelity. Only minor issues with flare. Reasonably small, light, excellent build...
I think that they way I think/feel about Sigma is very similar to what you think/feel about your DA* 16-50, Paul.
Boris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
