Consensus in the past is that the Sigma is very sharp - almost as good as the Fa24 except when it comes to flare control. I think it will far exceed the 20-35 unless flare is an issue. Of course with wide angle lenses, flare is more common and if you shoot sunsets or sunrises, then SMC would really make a big difference. You can get the Sigma incredibly cheap second hand and it is very good for the money.
>From past posts: "FA* 24/2 is quite sharp but it is less sharp than my old Sigma 24/2.8 MF at infinity, both in the centre and at the edges. The difference is not big but noticeable on comparison shots. However, at closer distances, FA* remains sharp, not so with Sigma." Matjaz "I had the MF version which was excellent optically - sharpness and colour. However, built quality and flare control were quite poor." Alan Chan This is all I still have on file - maybe the archives will say more if you do a search. This is the first I have heard about the reduction in aperture on Pentax and I don't believe it as I would remember if anyone mentioned it. I thought long and hard about getting one of these cheap, but went with the Pentax for flare control in the end. > -----Original Message----- > From: Rodelion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: 12 September 2002 16:49 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? > > > And a reply on my own question, which, unfortunately has not > yet been answered... I'd also like some comment on the SMC > Pentax FA 20-35 f4 AL? (overal performance, build, such things) > > ThankS!! > > Rod. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Rodelion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Thursday, September 12, 2002 09:28 > Subject: Has anyone used sigma AF 24/2.8 on pentax? > > > > G'day y'all. > > > > And? Have you? I know this lens is neat, but I've heard something > > about > that > > the effective aperture on a pentax mount is only 3.5? And > what about > > vignetting, really that bad? > > > > thanks, > > > > Rod. > > > > > > > >
