On Sat, Jan 04, 2014, Attila Boros wrote: > On Sat, Jan 4, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Boris Liberman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Attila, you have to realize that this Sigma has nothing on the market to >> compare it to. DA* 16-50 is a different lens. It has WR, it is wider and >> longer as far as zoom range goes, while Sigma boasts tremendous image >> quality and the USB dock so that you could play with your copy to your heart >> liking. > > I'm thinking since I already have the DA* 16-50, would it really make > sense to also get the Sigma? Given the same focal range, is it really > better? That USB dock looks like a very good idea, focus calibrating > zooms is a nuisance for me. They require different adjustments on wide > and long ends, and I have to make a compromise.
The only reason to get the Sigma 18-35 is if F2.8 isn't wide enough for you. A zoom F1.8 is pretty amazing, but as you say, the focal length range is more limited. -- Hugs and backrubs -- I break Rule 6 http://rule6.info/ <*> <*> <*> Help a hearing-impaired person: http://rule6.info/hearing.html -- 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.
