[Indecent Exposure]

Recently having purchased an identical pair of NOS (New old Stock) Sigma 24mm PK Wide auto focus lenses. I am a bit troubled as to determining from the lens data-base exactly where this lens fits in or if a new category should be posted.

PentaxForums.com Third-Party Lens Review Database - Sigma 24mm f2.8 Super Wide II Lens Reviews


PentaxForums.com - Indecent Exposure's Album: 3rd party PK mounts - Picture


Please excuse the IQ of this image it was a quick snap just to get this posted right before a rainstorm.

As one can determine from the image in my album the grip is quite different from the image in the database.

Having experienced using this lens. This is quite a very nice lens and the IQ is extraordinary and quite exceptional, plus this is one heck of a very fast lens. It certainly rivals if not outperforms the Pentax FA* 24/2 at roughly 1/10th of the cost. Also the size of this Sigma is more in the area of the Pentax FA 50mm 1:1.7. From the reviews within the database. I am not quite sure if this is where this lens quite belongs. The 24mm in my hands certainly preforms quite stunningly although it does have that awkward pinch lens hood. The build quality is very solid and extraordinary for a Sigma lens.

Having the manual from Sigma but not the original box makes it quite difficult to identify. All I know is I wish I would have visited this camera stores going out of business sale many days earlier. The proprietor sold most of his DA* lenses at a song.

The questions that come to mind are. Was this a lens that was produced on a limited short run by Sigma? Among quite a few other 24mm's throughout the years that I have used from Sigma this lens not like any that I have seen before.

Any thoughts on this would be most helpful.

[farfisa]

The lens is lumped together with the manual focus version, but optically they're the same. If you read the reviews, you'll see some are of the AF version.

I liked how close it focuses!

[jeffrey r]

As farfisa said, there are a couple of MF versions of this lens, as well as the AF version, so they will look a bit different. But my AF Superwide II lens looks like the one in your second link. I had to buy the snap-on hood separately as my used copy did not come with one.

It is a very good lens, and I love having this focal length in a prime lens. Note that it is prone to flare, and it generally overexposes, so you should always use the hood and you will likely find you need to dial down the EC when using the Sigma. This gets to be a bit of a pain when swapping lenses, as I always seem to forget to put the EC back to normal for my other lenses when out and about.

Enjoy the lens--the AF version is pretty hard to come by.

[MPrince]

But my AF Superwide II lens looks like the one in your second link.

Ditto.

[dadipentak]

Ditto.

Ditto Matt's ditto. I'm a fan of this lens.

[Indecent Exposure]

The lens is lumped together with the manual focus version, but optically they're the same. If you read the reviews, you'll see some are of the AF version.

I liked how close it focuses!

Thanks so much for your reply. After thoroughly reading the the review thread's this does become quite a bit more clear.

Just a thought about these being lumped together, would it not be more prudent to separate each lens with an individual category for each lens or at least a sub-category?

At least this would individually identify each lens and its characteristics for individual review.

[Indecent Exposure]

As farfisa said, there are a couple of MF versions of this lens, as well as the AF version, so they will look a bit different. But my AF Superwide II lens looks like the one in your second link. I had to buy the snap-on hood separately as my used copy did not come with one.
It is a very good lens, and I love having this focal length in a prime lens. Note that it is prone to flare, and it generally overexposes, so you should always use the hood and you will likely find you need to dial down the EC when using the Sigma. This gets to be a bit of a pain when swapping lenses, as I always seem to forget to put the EC back to normal for my other lenses when out and about.
Enjoy the lens--the AF version is pretty hard to come by.

I agree with the EC but then I tend to work quite often with individual settings for each lens.
I have not really noticed any flaring on my K-10 but just a slight amount of purple fringing. Having said this I have not shot without the lens hood. This is much more apparent when shooting in full resolution JPEG mode. This easily removed and less apparent when shooting RAW in post processing. For some reason when shooting similar images on my other K-10 that has the recent firmware upgrade this problem could not be duplicated. I find that quite interesting. Looks like Pentax fixed something.
While shooting with my K7 no flaring or fringing was noticed.
With just two days of shooting with this lens and comparing it with my DA *24. My findings so far. I consider the Sigma to be a better and faster lens than the DA.
When buying the pair they were the last two lenses in the store. As I walked out the door with the owner. He turned off the lights and locked the door and he broke into tears and mumbled "this the end of an era ,you know, digital did me in"
Carl had been in business for over 50 years. He just climbed in his car and drove away. I wish that time was available to show him how to do it on the internet. Even with that thought it would have been a very difficult challenge.

Just to clarify, I have had the DA *24 for quite some time, I purchased a pair of identical Sigmas that we are discussing here.

---

Last edited by Indecent Exposure; 06-02-2010 at 09:54 PM. Reason: clarification

[dadipentak]

I have had the DA *24 for quite some time,

DA*24mm?

[Indecent Exposure]

* equals Star, was not correctly referencing to the DA 12-24* but the FA*24 my bad, fast typing fingers and my was thinking DA.

[dadipentak]

* equals Star, was not correctly referencing to the DA 12-24* but the FA*24 my bad, fast typing fingers and my was thinking DA.

It's not a bad idea ;~)