Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
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. Thanks, Bob, for the info (even if it's not exactly what I was hoping for - g). Fred
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
RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
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
RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
Rob, Toni also told me that the 28-135 Sigma is much better than the 28-80. DG At 03:31 PM 9/9/02 +0100, you wrote: 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
RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
Man she would just love the 24-90!!! -Original Message- From: dick graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 September 2002 15:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's Rob, Toni also told me that the 28-135 Sigma is much better than the 28-80. DG At 03:31 PM 9/9/02 +0100, you wrote: 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
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
on 09.09.02 16:48, dick graham at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob, Toni also told me that the 28-135 Sigma is much better than the 28-80. Well, I must admit that photos taken with my Sigma 28-135 are slightly sharper than ones made by my girlfriend using FA 28-70/4. I think this is the best standard consumer lens made by Sigma, not as good as EX series, but still very good, even compared to others (consumer grade), including Pentax. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
I have one Sigma zoom and I don't think too much of it. It's the 35-70mm f3.4~4.5 Zoom Master. I prefer the Takumar 28-80mm f3.4~4.5 which according to some has barrel wobble - mine doesn't and takes good pictures. But to get to the point. One of the best lenses I have ever used is the Sigma 50mm f2.8 Macro EX I got from Al's Cameras a few years ago. I've used a lot of lenses, some cost tens of thousands of dollars and never left the laboratory, others were on cameras like my long series of Alpa Reflex models going back to the late 1950s. The lens I used most was the Kern Macro Switar 50mm f1.7. A great lens that easily resolved 250 line pairs on high resolution plate in my lab. But I've taken better pictures with the Sigma on an ME Super, P30 or P30T than I ever managed with the Switar. The MTF of this lens, from the Hasselblad lab in Sweden, can be found on the www. I can't remember where it is, but this lens has a rating of 4.2 and 4.8 is about as good as you can get; only one lens, a Tamron or Canon telephoto(?), reached 4.6 (was it?). One of you will know where all this information can be found. Dr E D F Williams http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams Author's Web Site and Photo Gallery Updated: March 30, 2002 - Original Message - From: Rob Brigham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 09, 2002 5:46 PM Subject: RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's Man she would just love the 24-90!!! -Original Message- From: dick graham [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 09 September 2002 15:49 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's Rob, Toni also told me that the 28-135 Sigma is much better than the 28-80. DG At 03:31 PM 9/9/02 +0100, you wrote: 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
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
And is on sale at both Adorama and BH for $129 USD. DG At 05:25 PM 9/9/02 +0200, you wrote: on 09.09.02 16:48, dick graham at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob, Toni also told me that the 28-135 Sigma is much better than the 28-80. Well, I must admit that photos taken with my Sigma 28-135 are slightly sharper than ones made by my girlfriend using FA 28-70/4. I think this is the best standard consumer lens made by Sigma, not as good as EX series, but still very good, even compared to others (consumer grade), including Pentax. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
You too would come to the same conclusion if you had one fall apart on your hands! (28-80 Sigma Zoom) Bob - Original Message - From: dick graham [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 10, 2002 12:28 AM 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
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
Hi, Bob, Gotta agree with you there. I have one Sigma, an older 80's vintage APO 3.5-4.5 50-200 zoom. It takes very nice pictures. Sharp, nice (but not the best) bokeh - optically very competent. Nice all metal barrel. But the aperture ring is plastic. Very flimsy plastic, such that one can easily deform it by using quite ordinary pressure on it while adjusting the aperture. One has to use a ~very~ light touch on it, because it deforms to the extent that it can be difficult to turn. This, on what would have been a fairly expensive lens in its time. Luckily I got it on eBay for a song, but it really takes much of the pleasure out of using it, and makes me wonder how long it's going to last... I guess everything I've read about that famous Sigma build quality is true. regards, frank Bob Rapp wrote: You too would come to the same conclusion if you had one fall apart on your hands! (28-80 Sigma Zoom) -- The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true. -J. Robert Oppenheimer
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gotta agree with you there. I have one Sigma, an older 80's vintage APO 3.5-4.5 50-200 zoom. It takes very nice pictures. Sharp, nice (but not the best) bokeh - optically very competent. Nice all metal barrel. But the aperture ring is plastic. Very flimsy plastic, such that one can easily deform it by using quite ordinary pressure on it while adjusting the aperture. One has to use a ~very~ light touch on it, because it deforms to the extent that it can be difficult to turn. This, on what would have been a fairly expensive lens in its time. Luckily I got it on eBay for a song, but it really takes much of the pleasure out of using it, and makes me wonder how long it's going to last... I guess everything I've read about that famous Sigma build quality is true. Sigma mist have a weird history. I've had a couple of their old, manual focus primes that were really solidly built: All metal construction, good focusing feel. Very nice indeed. When they went to autofocus it seemed they really slipped for a while. The 18-35 zoom I had took nice enought photos (especially for the price) but felt like it was made of plastic and cardboard. *Cheap* plastic and cardboard, at that! The recent 28-135 zoom is much better. Feels like an above-average quality consumer grade zoom. The EX series 300/2.8 is just top notch in terms of construction and image quality. Of course, it should be for the price. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Photorgaphy and writing
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
After looking down on Sigmas for years, I spent $800 on a 100-300 f:4 EX and don't regret it one bit in terms of construction and image quality. It's true. You get what you pay for. With Sigma, one cannot judge their built quality by how they felt, but need to actually use them for a period of time to know if they were good. I had 4 Sigma manual focus lenses, and 1 of them were junk mechanically. 1 with self-destructed rubber, aperture ring and gold plated contacts. The other 2 were fine, except all with poorly design aperture mechanisms (noticeable only to those who repair lenses). regards, Alan Chan _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com
RE: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
-Original Message- From: Alan Chan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: September 9, 2002 10:25 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's With Sigma, one cannot judge their built quality by how they felt, but need to actually use them for a period of time to know if they were good. I had 4 Sigma manual focus lenses, and 1 of them were junk mechanically. 1 with self-destructed rubber, aperture ring and gold plated contacts. The other 2 were fine, except all with poorly design aperture mechanisms (noticeable only to those who repair lenses). I have 4 Sigma EX series lenses and used to own a UC series which I sold. I am very pleased with both the mechanical and optical quality of the EX series. In fact the 20 mm 1.8 is the sharpest lens I have ever owned. The 70-210 UC served it's purpose, certainly it was not on a par with the EX series, but as a compact consumer grade lens, it was a good value and mechanically fine in two years of use. Cheers, Mike.
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
Re: Pentax FA / Tamron vs Sigma 28-200's
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
