ah so - yes much better
well done!
ann
On 1/17/2016 7:48 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
Ann, I posted an intermediate file. It's replaced now.
On 1/17/2016 7:12 PM, ann sanfedele wrote:
I agree with Rick - like it a lot except... for the cyan/greenish
color cast - which
may well be the ambient light in the place but I find a bit
distracting to an otherwise very
enticing shot.
ann
On 1/17/2016 5:54 PM, Rick Womer wrote:
I like the photo a lot. Everything works well together, including
the can of soda!
(I don't care about the lens.)
Cheers,
Rick
On Jan 17, 2016, at 5:46 PM, P.J. Alling wrote:
Part of a continuing series, (of people, usually young, more
interested in their hand held devices, than the events at hand).
First the PESO
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/1604247/PESO/PESO%20--%20LifeoftheParty.html
Equipment: Pentax K5II w/Sigma Zoom 70-210mm f4.0~5.6 UC-II
Now a the beginning of a possible multi part review of the afor
mentioned lens. A series that could be subtitled as "Photography
on no budget".
A little back story. I've been gifted with this nice, but,
pedestrian Sigma 70-210mm Zoom. Nothing special, really. I
haven't been able to find out a lot about it. It's not current in
the Sigma line, but I was able to find a PDF of an old Sigma
Catalog and it was one of their offerings from 1995. Which caused
a bit trepidation on my part as that was the tale end of the
Sig[nificant] Ma[lfunctions] period of Sigmas history.
It as near as I can tell it was intended to be an alternative to
the OEM offering in a two lens kit. I'll compare it to the Pentax
F 70-210mmm though in reality it was more likely competition for
the FA 70-200mm. I haven't done a lot of shooting with it as yet,
the weather's been miserable, cold and overcast when it's not
actually rainy, and like the F 70-210 it's, kinda slow, so I've
been using it mostly indoors bumping up the ISO quite a bit. I had
to shoot an event this weekend, so I dropped it into my bag, (it
doesn't take up much room and doesn't weigh much), and shot a few
available light of pictures with it. The PESO above is one of the
results.
So how does this lens stack up?
The build quality pretty good, but, it is mostly plastic. The
aperture ring has full marked f stops from 4-32 and half click
stops for the whole range. Where the Pentax F has both a metal
inner and outer barrel the Sigma is all Plastic. It does have a
nice metal, looks like stainless steel, lens mount. Aside from the
materials the zoom ring is nicely damped, at least as pleasant as
that on the Pentax F.
The focus ring is also nicely damped for an auto focus lens, with a
considerably shorter throw from it's closest focus to infinity than
the F 70-210 which is not damped at all. I'd say the focus feel is
about that of the Pentax FA 20-35mm maybe even a little better.
There is provision for a bayonet mount lens hood, but it's at least
10 years old so it would be good luck finding one, Sigma certainly
doesn't seem to offer them.
Auto focus using the K-5II is very quick, in all but the dimmest
light it just snaps into focus.
My preliminary judgement on it's optical characteristics is that
it's not quite as good as the Pentax F 70-210mm though I'm not sure
how much image softness is attributable to the the higher ISO's
I've been using. The sigma seems to be softer wide open throughout
it's range, and seems to have lower inherent contrast than the
Pentax F, I'll be able to tell better when I get a chance to shoot
in bright sunlight. It does seem to sharpen up when stopped down
even 1 stop.
I haven't noticed any Chromatic Aberration to speak of and there
doesn't seem to be much in the way distortion either. Straight
lines seem to be in fact straight.
So what are the drawbacks? Let's just say for the record that
based on what I paid for it, there are none. I got it for free.
However there are a couple of piddly annoyances that I've noticed
so far. Pentax Digital Camera Utility want's to identify this lens
as an F 35-105 f4-5.6 which is certainly interesting when it tells
me the photo was taken at 110mm, DXO Optics Pro 8 thinks that it's
a Sigma 70-300 and wants to apply those lens corrections. At least
they got the manufacture correct. My ancient copy of Photoshop
won't even attempt to identify the lens, even though they are
contemporaneous. Using an electronic flash the exposures can be way
off, haven't done much of that yet, so time will tell.
So what is there to say say. The Sigma is very compact, a good
7/16 inches shorter than the F 70-210mm at infinity and probably
30% or more lighter as well. It takes a 55mm screw in filter, and
with a decent lens hood, to cut down on flare the contrast might
even improve wide open.
Would I recommend this lens to others? At this point I'm not sure.
It seems to be pretty decent. I've never used a Pentax FA 70-200mm
f4.0~5.6 which is supposed to be not as good as the F 70-210, and I
expect this Sigma can be had for a lot less money when you can find
it, so maybe. I actually kind of like it.
I'll probably get a bit of use out if it, as my F 70-210 is jammed
and I'm not at all sure if it's worth even attempting to get it
repaired.
As usual comments are welcome but may be totally ignored.
--
I don't want to achieve immortality through my work; I want to
achieve immortality through not dying.
-- Woody Allen
--
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.
http://photo.net/photos/RickW
--
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.
