On 9/12/2013 9:32 AM, Doug Franklin wrote:
On 2013-09-12 1:37, Zos Xavius wrote:
Oh, I was looking at pentaxforums prices and saw 1500. I swear
pentaxforums reviews manipulate prices. So you are saying that the 400
is worth less? Interesting. I'd actually love to pick up a 400 even if
it said sigma on it. Those lenses were supposedly very good and work
well with matching TCs.
I don't know about that specific lens, but I have a different year or
model of the Sigma APO 400/5.6 Macro (mine looks different) and it's a
good lens. I've never bought a UG (ugly) rated item from Keh, but
I've bought numerous BGN (bargain) rated items, and been pleasantly
surprised each time by the condition.
I once owned a Sigma 400 f4.6 APO Macro. There were several other SIgma
400mm lenses around before that one, but the APO Macro was highly
regarded. The others were not held in such high esteem. Sigma used to
have a very bad reputation for quality - back in the 90's - but IMO they
really turned that around. That is one of the few lenses that I sold
that I had wished I held onto.
I wound up with a Tokina ATX 400 f5.6 which was regarded as being
comparable in quality to the Sigma. In my opinion it is very close in
qualty - at f8 - but lags at f5.6. Again - there were other variants of
the Tokina lens - the SD for instance - but the ATX was the latest and
the most highly regarded. I bought a replacement Tokina for $425 a few
years ago.
I tested both the Sigma and the Tokina with teleconverters and did not
find the results to be satisfactory - they are already pretty slow at f5.6.
Mark
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
