I agree about the color cast, but the body position of the two girls is excellent! Cheers, Christine
> On Jan 17, 2016, at 6:39 PM, Brian Walters <[email protected]> wrote: > > Nice shot - I agree with Ann about the colour cast but otherwise > enjoyable. > > I think I had that same lens (or very similar, at least) and used it on > my film cameras for a while before replacing it with a Pentax F 70-210. > I don't think I ever used it on digital. > > Sigma lenses (older ones, anyway) seem to be identified oddly by > software. When I had an 18-125 Sigma, it always got identified as > Pentax F 28-80mm F3.5-4.5, and more than a few of shots taken with the > lens were outside that focal length range. > > > Cheers > > Brian > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Brian Walters > Western Sydney Australia > http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/ > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016, at 09:46 AM, 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://www.fastmail.com - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free > > > -- > 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. > -- 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.
