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: [email protected] Subject: Re: Older Sigma AF lens info > Don Sanderson escribi�: > > > > > 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). >
