I've had and heavily use a brand new F 70- 210 for 28 years and have only one real issue with it - the focus barrel, to which filters screw into, rotates when it tries to attain focus, and subsequently I have to remember to reset the polarizer filter - it obviously not a biggie, which is to say I really, really like that lens, to the point that a few years back I picked up a duplicate even though The original lens continues on like a storm trooper!
Probably my third most used lens. Let's just keep it a secret P.J. -----Original Message----- >From: "P.J. Alling" <[email protected]> >Subject: Really mini review comparing the F 70-210 to Sigma Zoom 70-210. > >Most people don't care. However I recently acquired, a "new", at least >to me F 70-210 from KEH.com. So I thought I'd post the salient points >of the pros and cons of the two lenses. > >First off I think I'll say I don't hate the Sigma, I just don't love it >either and life is too short to put up with things you don't love if no >one is paying you for too. > >Physical comparison, the Pentax is about 1/2 inch, (~12mm), longer, only >slightly wider in diameter, and surprisingly not that much heavier than >the Sigma. > >The Pentax is mostly metal, and the Sigma is mostly plastic, most of the >weight in both lenses seems to be the glass. > >I've partially torn down a F 70-210 Pentax, (and also received back the >remnants of another used as a parts donor), so while looking at it from >the outside it appears to be a much more solid build, there are >decisions on interior construction that aren't quite so confidence >inspiring. I haven't torn down the Sigma but if it's anything like the >plastic Pentax lenses I've had apart, it is, other than in materials, >maybe better built. It would certainly be harder for things to get out >of alignment, (but once they do, in most cases, you might as well throw >the whole mess away). > >The Pentax has a very long focus throw, the focus ring is very narrow, >manual focus dampening is relatively light, but not too unpleasant, and >can be very accurate due to the long focus throw. Auto-focus can be slow >if the camera decides to rack the lens from infinity to closest focus. >The Sigma has a much wider manual focus ring, slightly better dampening >and a much shorter focus throw, about 45° as opposed to almost 130° for >the Pentax, so focusing when the Camera decides to rack the lens from >closest focus to infinity is a bit faster. Manual focusing is still >pretty easy to be fairly accurate and one of the things I really like >about the Sigma is, it's, for an auto-focus lens, luxurious wide focus >ring. That said, the K-5II very seldom racked the whole focus length to >find proper focus, except under the dimmest of lighting conditions. > >Optically the Pentax is just better, maybe not much, but enough that it >was noticeable. Pretty much at all focal lengths and apertures that I >normally use. I've owned three F 70-210mm lenses and the first was the >best, sharp at all focal lengths, the second was a little soft at around >210mm but still not too bad, the new one is probably somewhere between >the the first and second. The Sigma was never quite as sharp at any >focal length as the second Pentax. Not really bad it could be mostly >corrected in post processing, just not as quite as sharp. > >The Pentax focuses closer, the Sigma claims a 1:4.7 reproduction ratio, >(it's written right there on the focusing scale), the Pentax according >to Boz' site has a 1:4 reproduction ratio, it doesn't seem like much of >a difference, but once again it feels noticeable, I was always >frustrated with the Sigma in that regard. > >The Sigma is not as flare resistant as the Pentax, or maybe it is in >different ways. It seems to be more prone to veiling flare, so if a >bright light source is even close to being in frame there is a >noticeable loss of contrast and sharpness, the SMC coating on the Pentax >even though 15 years older is much more effective than the Sigma's. >Still it's hard to get actual flair artifacts with either lens at least >on a digital camera. I don't have the dedicated lens hood for the >Sigma, and an after market lens hood was one of those things I kept >putting off buying. I adopted an old Super Takumar lens hood for the >Pentax which works perfectly for the focal lengths on APS-C. > >Bokeh is different, but a lot of that has to do with how busy the >background is neither of these lenses will ever be mistaken for being >fast, so that's kind of a non issue. There are lots of other minor >differences, most of which aren't important in the digital era, such as >color rendering more a matter of taste, and easily manipulated in photo >software. > >I guess I could go on a lot longer. Let's get to the bottom line. > >The Sigma is a real bargain, you can pick one up for less than $40. in >Ex to LN condition, (or as KEH.com would call it Bargain), or for free, >the way I did. Optical and mechanical quality is reasonable, you get a >lot more than your 40 bucks worth. It's so cheap that it's almost not >worth selling it. So I'm not going to. It will sit on the shelf >collecting dust, (as a backup for that inevitable day when something >comes loose in the F 70-210 and I have do decide to repair or replace), >next to my film cameras and actual great lenses I seldom seem to use >because they are inconvenient, (more convenient to use on a Pentax >Digital than if I was a Canon user with a collection of the same >vintage, but still)... > >The Pentax is just better, slightly heavier, slightly bigger, mostly >metal with that cool feel of solidity that the K-5II has in the hand. >They don't look like they were made for each other, (in fact F lenses in >that greenish grey color are some of the silliest looking lenses in my >opinion), but they feel like they were made for each other. Sharper at >all focal lengths and f stops, than the Sigma, more flair resistant, >just all around, better, and you can find it /nearly/ as inexpensively >as the Sigma. > >-- >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.
