John Leonard wrote: > ... > I'm wondering whether that Sigma zoom is a bit too "budget".
Probably, yes. > I'm tempted to > replace it with a 28-105 internal-focussing (I just HATE that filter ring > turning). Have considered Pentax, Sigma, Tokina and Tamron. I've been satisfied enough with the Tokina but its coating and flare resistance just suck. Pentax has been already covered. The Tamron and Sigma 28-105/4-5.6 are pretty good and inexpensive. > Like the idea of > faster lens, so Sigma 28-105 F2.8-4 very attractive, but Sigma again? Need > to keep below 200 UK pounds (ideally). Forget it. It's a really bad lens. > > I've noticed that IF lenses seem to "whirr" more on focussing. Could the > increased load on the camera auto-focus drive be a problem? IMO, no. >I'm sure Pentax > would say using anything but a Pentax lens might wreck the camera, but what > is the truth? > ... It doesn't matter in the slightest, as long as the lens fit properly. There has been some discussion about some Vivitar MF lenses getting stuck on AF Pentax Bodies but in my experience it didn't crop up. In modern AF cameras and lenses there may be some grade of incompatibility WRT electronic innards (i.e. misreading of aperture values and the like. Some Sigmas seem to have that, sometimes). Bottom line: if you want speed and quality go for an affordable set of second hand primes. Relatively fast and good quality zooms are pretty heavy and expensive. For a comparative chart I laid down some time ago you can check: http://space.tin.it/arte/flamin/28-105.html I can't check it right now but it should still be there. Ciao, Flavio - 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 .
