>> what do you think about the Sigma 28-105 F2.8-4???? I am thinking
>> to buy this lens to replace my pentax FA 28-70 F4. In the 28-70 range,
>> is the sigma as good as/better/worse than pentax?
>
>Far worse. That's why you can find so many of those on the used market.
>
>Stay with the lens you already have or be prepared to spend significant
>money for f/2.8 semipro zooms. The cheaper Sigma 4-5.6 is said to be
>much better.
>
>Alternatively wait for the 24-90, it might be a very interesting lens
>and not too expensive.
>
>There's also a Sigma 28-135 but I don't know anything about it.
I have the 28-135 and like it quite a bit (much more than I
expected, actually).
I use it mostly for shooting stuff for my running web page
because it's a good wide range and reasonably small and light.
Sharper than my old Tamron 28-200 over 100mm.
Very solid-feeling construction for the price range.
Very useful "macro" switch gets you to half life-size
reporduction.
The biggest drawback is pincushion distortion at longer focal
lengths. How much of an issue this is for you will depend on
what kind of photography you do. It's rarely a problem for me.
If you do a lot of architectural photos forget it.
-
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.
