I wonder how the sigma stacks against the 55-300. My m50 1:4 is really sharp. Almost as sharp as the A50 1.7. I've heard the the FA is much weaker compared to the m/K 50 1.4s. I see that still holds true.
Collin Brendemuehl <[email protected]> wrote: >http://www.flickr.com/photos/55001392@N08/8643040116/in/set-7215763322447340 >7/ > >Distance it iPhone is about 8 feet. >Not the detail of the side switch on top and the bottom connector. > >#1 Sigma 70-300 DG APO zoom at 70mm. With that much extra length I >would >expect it to have more information. Still, it is also at one end of >the >range so images are often softer. Yes, this is dead-center in the >image. >But it's all there. > >#2 Pentax DA 18-55 WR at 55mm. Not as sharp as the Sigma, but not too >bad. > >#3 Pentax-F 50/1.7. The best of the batch. Almost wish I'd not >promised it >to someone. But that's ok. > >#4 Pentax FA 50/1.4. The worst of the batch. I tried several shots to >see >if the results would be consistent. They were. I'm disappointed. >It's not >bad; it's just not as good as I'd hoped. > >#5 Pentax-A 50/2.8 Macro. Again, several shots to check to see if >I'd >done something wrong. As before, not as good as hoped for, though >certainly >acceptable. > >Ok -- resolution is not everything. Having done a bunch of LF I have a >greater appreciation for image rendering than for resolving power. But >since rendering options are not available concerns on miniature >cameras, >resolution is the only question available. > >I was pleasantly surprised by the Sigma. It's a good zoom, though >certainly >not a great one. Next I'll take it outside and check the corners at >various >lengths. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
