Very nice photos! And especially with such an inexpensive lens. I looked it up and tried to find one for sale by itself, everyone has it in a kit with the 18-50. HotBuyElectronics :-( has it for $129.99 plus their outrageous shipping but I'm not that brave. Any ideas?
don > -----Original Message----- > From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 5:16 PM > To: Don Sanderson > Subject: Re: Tamron 28-75/2.8 arrived! WooHoo!! > > > Yes I meant 55-200. It is designed for the APS sized sensor. That is > why it is so small for the zoom range. I did some quick tests between > it and my Tokina 80-200/2.8 and Pentax 80-320. The Sigma was about as > sharp as the Tokina. The big difference is speed vs size/weight. > > Also the Sigma is built much cheaper - will not last as long, but it > is quite inexpensive. > > Many times a very small, light walk-around kit for me is the DA 16-45 > + Sigma 55-200. Those two lenses cover quite a wide range of focal > lengths. Here are a few sample shots from the 55-200: > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9415.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9460a.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9474.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9544.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9558a.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/gfm/imgp9561.htm > http://www.daytonphoto.com/Galleries/Misc/bkd_0005.htm > > -- > Best regards, > Bruce > > > Thursday, November 4, 2004, 2:57:03 PM, you wrote: > > DS> You may have answered my next post before I write it! (physic?) > DS> I just had out MY Tokina 80-200/2.8! And "lugging" is a good > DS> term to use for it. > DS> I am looking for a lighter zoom in the same range to carry > DS> for "everyday" use. > DS> I have the F 70-210/4-5.6 and though it's a very good lens > DS> I am looking for something a bit more "modern" to use. > DS> Getting rather tired of the "boy that's an ugly one!" > DS> comments. ;-) > DS> I'll take a look at the Sigma, did you mean "55"-200? > DS> Wierd range, but so is 16-45. > DS> I've been playing with the Tamron 28-200, it doesn't seem > DS> too bad stopped down a couple. > > DS> Don > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Bruce Dayton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 4:41 PM > >> To: Don Sanderson > >> Subject: Re: Tamron 28-75/2.8 arrived! WooHoo!! > >> > >> > >> Your reaction seems to be the same as most of us. I had the Tokina > >> lens at one point and based on size/weight and optical quality, the > >> Tamron is a real winner. It is mounted on my *istD quite often. > >> > >> One other suprisingly decent little lens is the Sigma 55-200/3.5-5.6 > >> DC. Very small, quite sharp and good manual focus. Also very cheap. > >> Mine is part of a small travel kit when I don't want to lug around the > >> Tokina 80-200/2.8. > >> > >> > >> Bruce > >> > >> > >> Thursday, November 4, 2004, 2:12:46 PM, you wrote: > >> > >> DS> I was a little leery of this lens because it was so much > >> DS> smaller and less expensive than the 28-70/2.8 ATX. > >> DS> It is smaller and lighter, it's also beautifully built. > >> DS> Zoom and focus (including MF) are firm and smooth. > >> DS> AF is quiet and fast, and on the "D" that viewfinder sure > >> DS> is bright! > >> DS> It's a very good looking lens and so far the test shots > >> DS> I've taken have been very sharp, well exposed, with > >> DS> accurate color. > >> DS> Flare control seems very good and Boket is quite > >> DS> pleasing. > >> DS> Focus to 13" (.33m) at all FLs is respectable. > >> > >> DS> This will probably become my standard lens very quickly, > >> DS> replacing several slower short zooms. > >> DS> The ATX at 810 grams would not have gotten lugged > >> DS> around nearly as often as this one at 300 less. > >> DS> Between this, the 16-45 and a Tamron MC7 TC a good > >> DS> multipurpose kit won't be bad to carry around at all. > >> > >> DS> Thanks to all who suggested it. ;-) > >> > >> DS> Don > >> > >> > >> > >> > > > >
