Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 7, 2006, 5:49 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Hello Mtclimber!

Check very well your Sigma lens for 100% comparably with Nikon cameras...my son own the 18-50 2,8 + the 20-30mm one, brought in Thailand, and now that he is thinking to change his D-70 for the D-200, in forums he read some "Up-date"...of the inside "Chips"...on both lenses...OK...Sigma dealer here will make it for free...but be aware!

BTW...I prefer Tamron to Sigma...at least for KM cameras!

Cheers,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 7, 2006, 7:13 AM   #32
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

Thanks MT. But, that was at f/9

Almost any lens I own would be OK at f/9. ;-) That must be some pretty darn good stage lighting (an understatement) to get 1/320 second at f/9, unless you caught the shot at the same time someone's flash fired.

I did see the shot of your husband you posted earlier. But, that was at f/2.8 (2 stops down from wide open, where a lens would be sharper). I'm interested in wide open performance (f/1.4 - f/2). But, even if it's acceptable on a Nikon body, that doesn't mean it will work fine on a KM DSLR. So, I'm waiting for more KM DSLR owners to get one and report findings. Sigma's reputation isn't the best for working with KM bodies without changes to the way the lenses are chipped during production.

I've only seen one review of the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 so far by a KM owner.

From what I hear, the Minolta mount version is shipping in Asia. But, it hasn't reached the U.S. dealers yet.

I'd like to see some more photos from one at wide open apertures. So far, most of the images I've seen posted have been using one stopped down.

My 28mm f/2 is acceptable at f/2 (and tack sharp corner to corner by the time you're down to f/2.8 ).

From the comments I've read on the Sigma, the Minolta 28mm f/2 is probably a better lens from a Chromatic Aberrations perspective (I've seen a few complaints about about CA from the Sigma 30mm f/1.4 around from Nikon and Canon owners).

I've also seen a few complaints on AF reliability at wide open apertures from Canon owners. This may or may not be user error (or an out of calibration camera body). If you're not shooting wide open, you probably wouldn't notice it (but, I'd need to use one wide open).

But, given Sigma's reputation for AF accuracy on KM bodies (rather poor as the lenses are often not calibrated well to the bodies, with Sigma needing to refine the way the lenses are chipped), I'd like to get more opinions from KM owners before spending my money on one.

I've also seen some comments that edge sharpness can leave something to be desired with the Sigma wide open (although I have seen comments that center sharpness is good and it seems to compare well to lenses like the Canon 35mm f/2).

What I'm interested in is how well the Sigma performs at f/1.4 to f/2 on a KM body. If it's not acceptable there, then there is no reason for me to upgrade. I haven't seen enough photos from it at wide open apertures yet to sway my opinion one way or the other.

But, if it's acceptable wide open on a KM DSLR body, I sure could use another stop in some of the low light clubs around here. The Minolta 35mm f/1.4G is not really a desirableoption (even if it were priced lower) since it's soft wide open at f/1.4 (as many f/1.4 lenses are). Although the softness may be better than motion blur. lol

Using my 28mm f/2, my shutter speeds are not fast enough using ISO 3200, shooting at f/2 to f/2.8 in some of the low light clubs (lit by a few candles) in the area with live music and no lighting on the perfomers. Next time I go to some of them, I may ask if it's OK to put a candle closer to the performer so that they're not in shadows. ;-)

I usually use my 28mm f/2 at around f/2.5 where it sharpens up some from wide open. An f/1.4 lens used between f/1.4 and f/2 would work much better, if it was reasonably sharp at wide open apertures.

So, I'm keeping a close eye out for more reports on the Sigma (as it may be a better option for me in very low light, if it's acceptable wide open on a KM DSLR body). Most shootouts seem to confirm that it compares well to similar Nikon and Canon primes.
JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 5:19 AM   #33
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Hi my dear Cope!

Today I make for the first time on my 7D body, with my 9 years old "Film" lens 24-85mm some photos. Yes I approve that is much better that my obtained "Kit" one. Sorry; I seized one photo only!

Cheers,

Alex 007:|
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 9, 2006, 7:16 PM   #34
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

Alex, A beautiful picture. You were blessed with a beautiful background! I also saw the pictures you posted on another thread.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 4:19 AM   #35
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

My dear Cope!

Another example, from the same day & lens! Jim's it's 100% right..."All around use lens"!

Best wishes,

Alex 007:|
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 6:32 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
cope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 718
Default

Alex, I think you and jim are pretty much correct on the all around use lens, at least for what I would need. Of course, it depends upon where you walk around. Someone in a wooded area or urban setting needs less zoom than someone out in a bird sanctuary or possibly at a zoo. The 24-85 is close enough to a 35-135, and that length (or 35-205) is what I liked on my old X-700 20 years ago.



I like that last picture even more than the others; I guess it is the contrast between red and green.
cope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 10, 2006, 7:00 AM   #37
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

My dear Cope!

Yes...you are 100% right, also I own my first "Mount A"...when I brought my first Minolta autofocus a Maxxum 7000, during late 80ties...a Tokina 35-200mm 3,5/5,6...which will be very well suitable when I want to go to a Zoo per example...it's extremely heavy for nowadays likewise focal lenses.

Cheers,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2006, 8:56 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Hi KM lovers.

A example what a "Kit" lens can produce at 70mm range!

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 20, 2006, 8:59 AM   #39
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Another one this time Sepia!

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Attached Images
 
Alex 007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Oct 1, 2006, 5:32 AM   #40
Senior Member
 
Alex 007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Ariel/Israel
Posts: 1,177
Default

Dear Alan,

What you say...when Sigma will release their newer 18-200mm "OS" (Anti-Shake; VR; IS...etc...!), will work together with the body 7D - 5D - Sony Alpha stabilizer...my silly question IF...can be use together as a TWICE Stabilizer?

If yes; (I really hope so?):!:; we will obtain much better final results

Any input will be welcome

Peace,

Alex 007:|
Alex 007 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 11:05 AM.