Steve's Digicams Forums

Steve's Digicams Forums (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/)
-   Olympus dSLR (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr-40/)
-   -   SIgma or Zuiko (https://forums.steves-digicams.com/olympus-dslr-40/sigma-zuiko-82419/)

opusofid Mar 1, 2006 4:02 PM

I'm at a point where I'm ready to buy a new "zoom" lens.

The choices are listed above. Which one would you buy. Price is a factor thats why it one of these two lens. I'm shooting soccer and cheerleading events of my kids and some other odds and ends stuff like sunsets and the such. I bought the E-500 about 2 weeks ago and have taken about 1,000 picture with the stock lens (14-45mm). Or if any of you out there has a lens for the E-500 they would like to part with in that price range drop me a line.



Alan



Sorry the title should have said "40-150mm" I don't want to sound to much like a newby.


Greg Chappell Mar 2, 2006 8:00 AM

Let me start out by saying when it comes to optics you really do "get what you pay for". These are both relatively inexpensive, slow lenses. A couple of the subjects you are interested in using these lenses for, soccer and cheerleading events, are not slow moving activities, so you can use all the light you can get in order to acheive a fast enough shutter speed to freeze action instead of getting nothing but blurry images of your subjects because they're moving too fast.

With that in mind, I would suggest you spend the money on the Olympus. It is an f3.5 at 40mm, gradually slowing to f4.5 by 150mm, where the Sigma is an f4 to f5.6 lens. In the end, no matter which one you buyyou'll be spending most of the time shooting at ISO 1000 or faster with either lens, but the Olympus is marginally faster and I've seen some great images captured with it- not fast moving sports mind you, but it is a very nice general purpose lens. The Sigma is an OK lens, but an F5.6 lens at 200mm is the last thing you want to try and use torecord your intended subject matter.

In all honesty, you're going to need pretty good technique to get decentimages with either lens in any conditions with less than good sunlight, both in terms ofexposure, steady handholding and good post processing ability with noise reduction software because once you get into the ISO 1000, 1250 and above ratings, noise/grain can start to degrade your images-neither of these lensesare reallyfast enoughfor your intended purposes.

opusofid Mar 2, 2006 12:05 PM

Thanks Greg I understand and was leaning to the Zuiko lens because of that reason f3.5. I know I need fast but $800.00 plus is too fast for my wallet. Even ebay isn't saving much over what other online stores have them for.



On another note buying a demo lens from one of the ebay stores, is this a good deal or spend a little more and get new I mean $50 or so is $50 and could get my a nother CF card or battery. Just some other thoughts as I get ready to spend some hard earned cash on a toy or two.



Thanks again Alan

Greg Chappell Mar 2, 2006 1:46 PM

I understand about price!

One lens that is soon to be available in the Olympus E-mountis a Sigma 105mm f2.8. It sells in other mounts for around $380 at B&H in New Yorkand that should be about what the Olympus version costs. That would give you a fast 210mm f2.8 PLUS it is a macro, close focusing lens.

It's not a zoom of course, but it'd do the job for you. Just one other thing to think about.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:58 AM.