Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
Don Sanderson escribió: Has anyone ever met the AF Sigma 75-200mm f/3.8? Seems pretty uncommon but then Sigma's made about ten zillion different lenses. I have a 35-135/3.5-4.5 from the same era and it's pretty decent. This one's in the Speed/FL/Price range I'm looking for, but I've had some pretty c**ppy Sigmas. Don, my brother has one of those, and I had it on extended loan some time ago. It is a good lens, build wise is a trombone type of zoom, well built for a Sigma. The nice side of the lens is the 3.8 constant aperture, and it seems to go for cheap prices nowadays in Ebay. Comparing it to the other telezooms I have or had (F 70-210 4-5.6, FA* 80-200 2.8, FA 80-320 and a pair of manual focus Vivitars) I can say that in contrast and sharpness it isn't in the same class than the Pentax telezooms, but it is a good lens for the price and no worse than the best of the two Vivitars I had. It flares more than both the Pentaxes and Vivitars, but not too much. The only quirk I have found in this lens, and it shares this electronic bug with the Sigma 24 2.8 AF and 400 5.6 AF I have also used, is when you use it out the A position of the aperture ring the aperture readings in the viewfinder change randomly. I mean, you have the aperture ring of the lens in, say, 5.6, and the reading in the viewfinder is 6.7, then you close it half a stop further, and it says 8 when it should be 6.7 this time. You open half a stop and now it says 5.6, the same thing that you can see in the aperture ring. This behaviour is unpredictable, and it happens whenever you use the aperture ring out of the A position. In the 400 mm. 5.6 the only mistaken aperture was f:32, which appeared as 22 in the viewfinder. This problem doesn't have ill effects in the exposure, at least in my limited experience with this lens (the 75-200 3.8).
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
Thanks Carlos, that's the kind of info I needed. Don -Original message- From: Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 08:14:17 -0600 To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info Don Sanderson escribió: Has anyone ever met the AF Sigma 75-200mm f/3.8? Seems pretty uncommon but then Sigma's made about ten zillion different lenses. I have a 35-135/3.5-4.5 from the same era and it's pretty decent. This one's in the Speed/FL/Price range I'm looking for, but I've had some pretty c**ppy Sigmas. Don, my brother has one of those, and I had it on extended loan some time ago. It is a good lens, build wise is a trombone type of zoom, well built for a Sigma. The nice side of the lens is the 3.8 constant aperture, and it seems to go for cheap prices nowadays in Ebay. Comparing it to the other telezooms I have or had (F 70-210 4-5.6, FA* 80-200 2.8, FA 80-320 and a pair of manual focus Vivitars) I can say that in contrast and sharpness it isn't in the same class than the Pentax telezooms, but it is a good lens for the price and no worse than the best of the two Vivitars I had. It flares more than both the Pentaxes and Vivitars, but not too much. The only quirk I have found in this lens, and it shares this electronic bug with the Sigma 24 2.8 AF and 400 5.6 AF I have also used, is when you use it out the A position of the aperture ring the aperture readings in the viewfinder change randomly. I mean, you have the aperture ring of the lens in, say, 5.6, and the reading in the viewfinder is 6.7, then you close it half a stop further, and it says 8 when it should be 6.7 this time. You open half a stop and now it says 5.6, the same thing that you can see in the aperture ring. This behaviour is unpredictable, and it happens whenever you use the aperture ring out of the A position. In the 400 mm. 5.6 the only mistaken aperture was f:32, which appeared as 22 in the viewfinder. This problem doesn't have ill effects in the exposure, at least in my limited experience with this lens (the 75-200 3.8).
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
Hi DOn, Have you considered this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=detailsQ=sku=126973is=USA I think it's a little on the heavy side though. Just thought I would point it out to you, as it might be in your price range. I've never had one, but I've heard they are very good lenses. --- Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( TIA Don __ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Thanks Steve, yes I have considered it. I own the MF version of this and like it a lot. I'm still looking for something 'in between' this and a 5.6. I'll wind up with one of these or the Sigma, or the Pentax someday, if I get rich suddenly! TA Don -Original Message- From: Steve Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 10:28 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info Hi DOn, Have you considered this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=de tailsQ=sku=126973is=USA I think it's a little on the heavy side though. Just thought I would point it out to you, as it might be in your price range. I've never had one, but I've heard they are very good lenses. --- Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( TIA Don __ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Don, I'm in the market for the exact same lens you are looking for. Let me know what you end up going with. I'm hoping Pentax might come out with a new, longer zoom, specifically for the ist D/DS, but you know how slow they can be. I'm not wild about the Tokina 2.8 due to it's weight and price. --- Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Steve, yes I have considered it. I own the MF version of this and like it a lot. I'm still looking for something 'in between' this and a 5.6. I'll wind up with one of these or the Sigma, or the Pentax someday, if I get rich suddenly! TA Don -Original Message- From: Steve Pearson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 10:28 AM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info Hi DOn, Have you considered this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlistA=de tailsQ=sku=126973is=USA I think it's a little on the heavy side though. Just thought I would point it out to you, as it might be in your price range. I've never had one, but I've heard they are very good lenses. --- Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( TIA Don __ Do you Yahoo!? Dress up your holiday email, Hollywood style. Learn more. http://celebrity.mail.yahoo.com __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
I thought I would chime in with my dos pesos I know it is not popular to say anything nice about Sigma lenses, but mine has been a fine lens. Just after purchasing my first Pentax, a PZ-70, I needed an AF lens with a bit more reach. BH had a sale going on and they had a Sigma 1:3.8-5.6 28-200mm zoom AF in Pentax mount, so I bought it. This was in the mid-90's and to this day has performed flawlessly and has made many excellent images, up to 11x14. I have used it on the 70, a PZ-20, and in manual focus on a Chinon They later had an improved version with APO glass. Because of its range it has become my walking around lens no mechanical or other problems, including 3 trips to Ireland, so I can recommend it without reservation. Only gripe, does not focus particularely close. Jerry in Houston
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Hi Jerry are you talking about the Sigma 28-200mm 3.8-5.6 UC aspherical with 72mm filter size. I just got one with a P30 body and have not used it so far. I looked up some reviews and have read so far: - it's okay for the price, but otherwise not really recommended - not good at 28mm and 200mm (soft) 35-180mm okay - a lot of flare, hood does not help did you make the same experiences? greetings Markus -Original Message- From: Jerry in Houston [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, December 23, 2004 7:45 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info I thought I would chime in with my dos pesos I know it is not popular to say anything nice about Sigma lenses, but mine has been a fine lens. Just after purchasing my first Pentax, a PZ-70, I needed an AF lens with a bit more reach. BH had a sale going on and they had a Sigma 1:3.8-5.6 28-200mm zoom AF in Pentax mount, so I bought it. This was in the mid-90's and to this day has performed flawlessly and has made many excellent images, up to 11x14. I have used it on the 70, a PZ-20, and in manual focus on a Chinon They later had an improved version with APO glass. Because of its range it has become my walking around lens no mechanical or other problems, including 3 trips to Ireland, so I can recommend it without reservation. Only gripe, does not focus particularely close. Jerry in Houston
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Hi Jerry are you talking about the Sigma 28-200mm 3.8-5.6 UC aspherical with 72mm filter size. I just got one with a P30 body and have not used it so far. I looked up some reviews and have read so far: - it's okay for the price, but otherwise not really recommended - not good at 28mm and 200mm (soft) 35-180mm okay - a lot of flare, hood does not help I believe the UC was the upgraded version I referred to, with the APO glass. Mine does NOT say UC on the body. Well, I go by how the pictures look and not necessarily how it performs on the bench, and my pocket book too. I bought this one cuz it was the best price at the time. I am probably not as AR as some here but I like the lens, use it alot and it has served me well. I cannot speak for your needs, but just my own expience. YMMV Jerry in Houston
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
On 22/12/04, Don Sanderson, discombobulated, unleashed: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( Photography Review has quite a few: http://tinyurl.com/3wzxc Luminous Landscape looks at the 14 2.8: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/14-vs-16.shtml Epinions: http://www.epinions.com/elec-Photo-Lenses-All-Sigma This should keep you busy for a while ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Thanks Cotty, they have everything but the kitchen sink, and the ones I'm interested in. :-/ Has anyone ever met the AF Sigma 75-200mm f/3.8? Seems pretty uncommon but then Sigma's made about ten zillion different lenses. I have a 35-135/3.5-4.5 from the same era and it's pretty decent. This one's in the Speed/FL/Price range I'm looking for, but I've had some pretty c**ppy Sigmas. TIA Don -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 5:12 PM To: pentax list Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info On 22/12/04, Don Sanderson, discombobulated, unleashed: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( Photography Review has quite a few: http://tinyurl.com/3wzxc Luminous Landscape looks at the 14 2.8: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/14-vs-16.shtml Epinions: http://www.epinions.com/elec-Photo-Lenses-All-Sigma This should keep you busy for a while ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( I've got the EX 300/2.8 if yer interested. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
RE: Older Sigma AF lens info
Thanks Mark, I've got an ATX 300/2.8 MF which I seldom use. What I really need is a faster AF 80-200 or similar. I have a line on 2 75-200/3.8 Sigmas but not sure of the quality. I've had good and very bad Sigmas over the years. Don -Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2004 6:47 PM To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info Don Sanderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anyone know of a site(s) with info on Sigma AF lenses. I'm interested in the ones made over the last 5-6 years. Reviews, comments, specs, anything would help. Sigma has about the least informative site I've ever seen. :-( I've got the EX 300/2.8 if yer interested. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Older Sigma AF lens info
Thursday, December 23, 2004, 1:49:33 AM, Don wrote: DS Thanks Mark, I've got an ATX 300/2.8 MF which I seldom DS use. What I really need is a faster AF 80-200 or similar. DS I have a line on 2 75-200/3.8 Sigmas but not sure of the DS quality. I've had good and very bad Sigmas over the years. Hi Don, it's 3 in the morning and I just finished packing my backpack for christmas (I am leaving the city for a while g), so just quickly before I go to sleep... I have had a Sigma from what I believe is similar period - 75-200 2.8-3.5 (manual focus). It wasn't a bad lens, but: 1) flare - in my experience the fast Sigmas from that period (also the 28-70 2.8 first type before the EX types) exhibit lot of flare, both reflections and veiling glare. So look out for that. 2) build quality - my wasn't exactly good :-( The zoom was quite loose, the whole lens wouldn't stay at IMO, Sigmas from that period aren't so good. They are sharp but their other characteristics I didn't like OTOH, the 3.8 might be different in both regards. I never tried that one. If you can live with manual focus, I can well recommend the Tamron SP 70-210 3.5 I had it before getting an 2.8 zoom and it was quite good, both mechanically and optically. Actually, the build of that lens was amazing g. Sorry for not providing a good answer :-( Good light! fra
