Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Oct 28, 2006, 7:44 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

When I was down to NY the Mecca B&H last yr. I bought quite a few lens and they allowed me to open and try out The Sigma, I did not pay too much attention and maxed it out at 200mm2.8. It was soft but still impressive. You could see how busy the place was

Daniel
Attached Images
 
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Oct 28, 2006, 7:46 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

I did not bother to look further and moved on as my budget was obviously exceeded quite a bit on that day. I have chance to look through now. And I saw this one at 135 mm. Definitely quite something. It pops out . Sorry about my composition if any . I have no clue if it can beat my FA135mm 2.8.

The 2nd one was deliberately taken at middle of the focal length and only 1/2 stop down .

Is the lens considered to be an affordable alternative of FA*80-200?

Now that Roy has tried out the other substitute Tokina 80-200 but without success

Daniel


Original and exif at http://www.pbase.com/danieltong/image/74188404
Attached Images
 
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 10:18 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
mtngal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 16,056
Default

That second one is quite impressive! There's no way I can justify buying something along these lines this year, but it's something I'll have to keep in mind for the future.
mtngal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 10:21 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

It is a great lens, but somewhat soft at 2.8 compared to my FA* 80-200, which is much sharper.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 10:45 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

ennacac wrote:
Quote:
It is a great lens, but somewhat soft at 2.8 compared to my FA* 80-200, which is much sharper.

Tom


It is all understood and certainly reflected in their price. It is no slouch either.

Let me see the reception ofthe new DA*50-135 or DA*60-250 when they are out. Meanwhile I should hold out with the lightweight FA135mm

Daniel

danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 28, 2006, 11:05 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
snostorm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,770
Default

danielchtong wrote:

" Is the lens considered to be an affordable alternative of FA*80-200?
Now that Roy has tried out the other substitute Tokina 80-200 but without success"


Hi Daniel,

My impression is that the Sigma is considered the best alternative to the FA*80-200/2.8 out there. However, I have the Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X Pro AFII, and it's not too shabby either. From what I've seen of IQ from the three, the FA* is noticeably sharper than the Sigma, and the Sigma is noticeably sharper than the Tokina, but the total difference isn't as great as it might seem, and the Tokina can be gotten for about $400 for an E or E+ sample if you can find one. The Sigma is generally @ $500-600 used and the FA* will go from $1200- ???? in whatever condition. SPLOSdb shows the FA* as a (!!), the Sigma as a (!), and the Tokina as a (**), and I tend to agree -- and from experience, really wouldn't hesitate to go for any of the (**) rated lenses.


I think that Roy's experience with the Tokina MF 80-200/2.8 is not typical because of the clouded lens element, and after handling one of the MF versions, I know I definitely prefer the AF version.

I opted for the Tokina because I wanted a fast zoom with this range for candids. I don't mind the degree of softness as most of my subjects seem to prefer this over super sharp (can't figure out why ). Since this is not a real high priority in my shooting, I find the tradeoff in sharpness for price to be a good one for me. If I did a lot more of this type of shooting, I'd probably hunt down an FA* and resign myself to paying the entry fee for this exceptional lens.

my .02

Scott
snostorm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2006, 5:15 AM   #7
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

i agree,, the lens i had was an older AT-X SD. it seemed to be relatively sharp at f2.8 if it was PPed rather extensively. but i can't say for sure what it was really like because of the cloudiness in the objective lens.

roy
  Reply With Quote
Old Oct 29, 2006, 11:09 AM   #8
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default

snostorm wrote:
Quote:
danielchtong wrote:

" Is the lens considered to be an affordable alternative of FA*80-200?
Now that Roy has tried out the other substitute Tokina 80-200 but without success"


Hi Daniel,

My impression is that the Sigma is considered the best alternative to the FA*80-200/2.8 out there. However, I have the Tokina 80-200/2.8 AT-X Pro AFII, and it's not too shabby either. From what I've seen of IQ from the three, the FA* is noticeably sharper than the Sigma, and the Sigma is noticeably sharper than the Tokina, but the total difference isn't as great as it might seem, and the Tokina can be gotten for about $400 for an E or E+ sample if you can find one. The Sigma is generally @ $500-600 used and the FA* will go from $1200- ???? in whatever condition. SPLOSdb shows the FA* as a (!!), the Sigma as a (!), and the Tokina as a (**), and I tend to agree -- and from experience, really wouldn't hesitate to go for any of the (**) rated lenses.
Scott
Scott,

All the OEM lens / zooms have to be competitive in price and performance. And 80-200 is a very very crowded market. To have an idea how an oem zoom performsis even more difficult as it may be just so so wide open but steller in certain focal length. A lot of time we have to go by the review of Canon or Nikon mount (of Sigma / Tokina).

Say if I know this Sigma 70-200 has its 90mm-180 mm comparable to if not better than Pentax *zoom, I will go for it. Period. the same applies to Tokina. But where do I get this info? Word of month only. From actual users like you. From what you have said, I am sure the Tokina * equivalent zoom is a very viable alternative.

Actually when I was at B&H, I asked for both Tokina and Sigma Pentax mount. After having all the focal length covered with primes. my next move is probably going back to zoom. And the new DA*50-135 or DA*60-250 are really what I am looking for. I will see how well it goes.

Daniel
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 6:51 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
danielchtong's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 2,890
Default





I believe everywhere it is out of stock now. Here is a pict posted by another Pentaxian with the lens wide open atF2.8



A very formidable lens arguably just below that of the FA* I believe .

I think Sigma has finished all its stock and is doing the re enginerring for the new USM/SSM motor for the lens.

Daniel , Toronto
danielchtong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 3, 2007, 12:20 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

This was shot with my Sigma 70-200 2.8 although not wide open. I found it to be a great lens, lighter than the FA* 80-200 2.8, but sharpness I wanted at 2.8 was not there so I sold it.

750 sec, @ 9.5, ISO 400


Tom
ennacac 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 3:33 AM.