Well let me say that the biggest improvement I have ever seen in my photography was moving from the Sigma 28-80 to a Sigma 28-70 EX. The difference was stark - I suddenly realised that many of my older photos werent bad because I was no good, but because they were soft, had no detail and no contrast/colour. Even though the 28-70 is not a patch on the best lenses out there, I could not believe the improvement!
I am not saying all Sigma consumer lenses are rubbish, I love the 70-300APO (for the money), and I think the 28-135 is reasonably well regarded but anyone who tells you they love the 28-80 is either lying or doesn't know what they are talking about. > -----Original Message----- > From: dick graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 09 September 2002 15:29 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's > > > Don't be so quick in condemning Sigma consumer grade lenses. > Check out > Toni Lankerd's stuff on www.photocrituque.net , look under "list by > photographers" ,especially the third one down "ambience". > Toni is a long > time PUG contributor and a field editor for the e magazine Nature > Photographer. She uses Pentax bodies and Sigma 28-80 and > 28-135 consumer > grade lenses as her main stays, and she tells me she loves > the glass. Both > of these lenses have had good lens test reports from Pop Photo. > > > DG > > At 12:33 PM 9/7/02 +1000, you wrote: > >The general feeling is that the original Tamron/Pentax were > dogs. The > >later Tamron is much better. I know little about the Sigma > other than I > >would never buy a Sigma consumer lens - which this is. > > > >Bob > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Fred" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Sent: Saturday, September 07, 2002 12:26 PM > >Subject: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's > > > > > > > Hello out there in Pentax-Land. > > > > > > Does anyone have any experience with both of the following lens > > > designs, and (if so) could compare them - > > > > > > The Pentax FA / Tamron 28-200/3.8-5.6 (I understand that > these are > > > the same lens) > > > > > > - versus - > > > > > > The Sigma 28-200/3.5-5.6 > > > > > > Yes, I understand that these "do-everything" (<g>) lenses are > > > chock-full of compromises, but nonetheless I am > interested in their > > > comparative optical and build qualities. > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > Fred > > > > > > > > >
