Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 9, 2007, 8:01 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,052
Default

simowills wrote:
Quote:
Hi all,
I Know that primes are supposed to be much better than their similar zooms, ie 300 to a 100-300, but how does a new lens such as a Sigma 100-300 Ex f4 stack up against one of your older classic lenses lika a *300 f4.5???
Sorry in this offends anyones feelings, comparing the two, But I for one have a lot better chance of getting the Sigma zoom than a Pentax prime and keeping both kidneys.
LOL! I know what you mean. I can't provide a comparison, since I don't have one of the zooms that go to 300mm. However, I do have the A*300 f4 (I ended up deciding that auto focus wasn't worth the extra kidney). It was my first really good lens, and I was personally blown away by the added quality it offered. It convinced me that good glass is worth waiting for, paying for and has added to my enjoyment. It's not that a lesser lens won't give you good pictures (it will) but it might require more pp because they might not "pop" right out of the camera as well. It's not something I can quantify.

Having said that, though, I've seen a number of people post outstanding pictures here taken with the Sigma 70-300 APO and the Tamron equivalent. I would be interested if someone would do a head to head competition (especially if they are better at taking comparisons than I am!).
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2007, 9:01 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
ishino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
Default

simowills wrote:
Quote:
Hi all,
I Know that primes are supposed to be much better than their similar zooms, ie 300 to a 100-300, but how does a new lens such as a Sigma 100-300 Ex f4 stack up against one of your older classic lenses lika a *300 f4.5???
Sorry in this offends anyones feelings, comparing the two, But I for one have a lot better chance of getting the Sigma zoom than a Pentax prime and keeping both kidneys.
rhermans posted some shots using the sigma ex 100-300 apo dg f/4 in the main pentalx dslr forum. they look spectacular to me. personally i have never had a chance to compare both. my sigma ex 100-300 apo dg f/4 should be here in a couple more days.

http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=80
ishino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 9, 2007, 12:02 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

simowills wrote:
Quote:
Hi all,
I Know that primes are supposed to be much better than their similar zooms, ie 300 to a 100-300, but how does a new lens such as a Sigma 100-300 Ex f4 stack up against one of your older classic lenses lika a *300 f4.5???
Sorry in this offends anyones feelings, comparing the two, But I for one have a lot better chance of getting the Sigma zoom than a Pentax prime and keeping both kidneys.
Hi simowills,

Most zooms won't compete with a premium prime in the same focal length, but in this case (and there are others) we're talking about zooms which are designed with pro level speed and optical performance in mind (with a correspondingly high price tag), so the "rule" gets a little blurry. Some "Pro" level zooms like this one, while they won't give you quite the same numbers in a formal resolution test, will be so close that it really doesn't matter that much in normal field use, especially when the lens was designed to give close to optimum performance at the long end. With this particular lens, there have been reports of example variation in focusing accuracy, but the good ones are very very good (as you can see in Ronny's shots, for example).

I'd put it in the same optical class as the *300/4/4.5s, with the * lenses getting the nod (barely) in absolute resolution. What the DA*300/4 might bring remains to be seen, but until it's out, the Sigma 100-300/4 is the best reasonably fast, reasonably available 300mm alternative out there, and if you've got a good one, I doubt that you'd be looking for a replacement from an optical performance standpoint, even if the DA* is as good as the * designation suggests it will be. The only practical reason would be that the DA*300/4 should be over a lb lighter (under 2 lbs as opposed to over 3 lbs), and will probably be significantly smaller, and that lb can make a very big difference when you're talking about easily handholding it over an extended shoot.

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 10, 2007, 3:14 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mornington, Australia
Posts: 697
Default

Thanks to all,
What I take from the comments that have been made is what I was hoping for, I suppose. The impression I get is that the "Ex" type lens are an upper level lens designed to deliver very good performane for thoes wishing to keep the majority of their shoots, and internal organs.... I suppose when I'm 100% better and taking the shots then I'll be looking for the 20% (or watever ) better glass performance. Maybe I should look at the results of what I have and say to myself "that's ok" instead of "if I'de only done....... , or had...... )
Thanks again
Simon
simowills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 12, 2007, 9:17 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
PinonMesaJon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 116
Default

ishino wrote:
Quote:
my sigma ex 100-300 apo dg f/4 should be here in a couple more days.

I got my Sigma 70-300 APO DG f/4-5.6 a few days ago...... Different price category, but I'm definitely looking forward to testing it out soon.

PinonMesaJon is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 5:51 PM.