Op Thu, 17 Nov 2005 14:26:35 +0100 schreef Don Sanderson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

I didn't mean to say that ALL Sigma 28-80s are better
than ALL FA28-70s.
I seem to have 2 exceptional 28-80s and one VERY bad
sample of the 28-70.

Just your luck :/

The only reason I'm arguing is that your posts could lead to an overly
positive image for the 28-80. I'd hate people to think it's a great
bargain: I think it's about worth the $25,- that seller asked for it...
Besides: after all the talk of limiteds and FA*'s, I wouldn't want to miss
a thread on a lens I actually know :o)

If anything it explains why lens opinions vary so much.
My last 28-70 was quite good, this one is terrible.
I don't think many people realise just how big the
difference can be from one sample to the next.
I didn't till I saw it with my own eyes.
I do understand the "jaw drop" reaction, it's what
I had when I used the K135/2.5 after being used
to the Takumar Bayonet 135/2.5.
The Takumar was what I could afford at the time, it
was better than nothing and gave me a cheap way to
decide whether the focal length was useful to me.
Once I decided it was, I went for the next "best I
could afford" version.
That's the way my hobby has always worked, try it,
and if I like it, go for a better one as money
allows.
That's how I worked my way up to an FA50/1.4, one
50 at a time. First one was under $10.00, the FA
sure wasn't!
Ain't hobbies fun? ;-)

Great fun. I'm currently in the process of moving from an A50/1.7 to an
A50/1.4 (to get rid of the overly obvious haxagonal highlights). I think
I'll reach AF in another decade or so :o)

--
Regards, Lucas

-----Original Message-----
From: Lucas Rijnders [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2005 1:43 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: A good zoom lens deal.


Op Wed, 16 Nov 2005 23:53:35 +0100 schreef Don Sanderson
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

<snip>

> It actually performs better than the new 28-70/4 AL I just
> bought for $115.00, unfortunately I waited too long to return
> that one! ;-(

<snip>

And this is where we disagree: I've shot the sigma 28-80 almost
exlusively
for three years (kit-lens syndrome). Then I got a FA28-70/4, my jaw
dropped, and I never put the sigma on the camera again. And the
FA28-70/4
(or something like an A50/1,7) isn't exactly expensive either...
--
--
Regards, Lucas

Reply via email to