Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-20-2010, 10:46 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
wait until some folks start comparing it to Pentax 85s or 77ltd... they you'll see the hardcore fanboysm

truth though... from the examples I've seen so far it seems to be mighty impressive lens, but with the price tag that matches Pentax's 77
Peter, the FA77's price is cheaper now which makes a little more attractive. it's a nice little lens with an awesome resolution. too bad it is 77 and f1.8. the only two things I didn't like about it.

10-20-2010, 11:04 AM   #17
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
Peter, the FA77's price is cheaper now which makes a little more attractive. it's a nice little lens with an awesome resolution. too bad it is 77 and f1.8. the only two things I didn't like about it.
Much much much MUCH rather get a FA 77 than a Sigma 85. If it was a FA 85, then that's another story.
10-20-2010, 11:13 AM   #18
Pentaxian
Mike.P's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Coast .. UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,734
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
It turns out to be lighter at 345 grams compared to 450 for the Sigma. The Sigma just doesn't seem all that large to me at 95mm (3.8 inches and 16 ounces). I guess that's because of being used to the Vivitar S1 and the Nikkor. The Nikkor has some weight to it at 790 grams an 116mm in length, but it is an excellent macro.
I'm not saying the Sigma 105mm is too heavy or large (I was using the 180mm version hand held up until a few weeks ago). You said you didnt know of a 100mm macro smaller or lighter than the Sigma and I provided one.
10-20-2010, 11:22 AM   #19
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
Much much much MUCH rather get a FA 77 than a Sigma 85. If it was a FA 85, then that's another story.
if there wasn't a Sigma option, I could had opted for the FA* 85.

10-20-2010, 01:53 PM   #20
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by Eagle_Friends Quote
I've owned the DFA 100mm Macro WR for a couple of months, and it is much small than any Sigma or Tamron. It is practically the same size as the kit lens.
Tammy doesn't have a 100 or 105 macro. As far as the 90 goes, it depends on which one you are talking about. There are ~ 10 different ones. I actually have a 52B and 52BB. The 52B is small but heavy.
10-20-2010, 02:12 PM   #21
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
Peter, the FA77's price is cheaper now which makes a little more attractive. it's a nice little lens with an awesome resolution. too bad it is 77 and f1.8. the only two things I didn't like about it.
Is it? I'll have to check on this side of the puddle... But might be. 77 I don't mind, I feel rather comfortable, 1.8 it's fine by me too. The only thin is that it's all in one. I'd much rather have 85/1.8 but there isn't AF option
10-20-2010, 02:14 PM   #22
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
wait until some folks start comparing it to Pentax 85s or 77ltd... they you'll see the hardcore fanboysm

truth though... from the examples I've seen so far it seems to be mighty impressive lens, but with the price tag that matches Pentax's 77
The Sigma 85/1.5 is gi-normous compared to the FA 77mm/1.8 ltd.

86.4 x 87.6 mm and 745 grams compared to 64 x 48mm and 270 grams. It is still a fairly compact lens though nearly 2 pounds. I am curious if anyone has tried it on a film body or ff Nikon dslr.
10-20-2010, 02:16 PM   #23
axl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I don't know of a 100 or a 105mm that is really any smaller or lighter than the Sigma. Even the Nikon 105 micro-nikkor lenses are about the same size and maybe heavier.
SMC DFA, SMC DFA WR, Tamron 90 (kind of unfair but sill...)

10-20-2010, 02:30 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 971
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Tammy doesn't have a 100 or 105 macro. As far as the 90 goes, it depends on which one you are talking about. There are ~ 10 different ones. I actually have a 52B and 52BB. The 52B is small but heavy.
The WR is smaller than the Tamron 90
10-20-2010, 02:35 PM   #25
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,166
QuoteOriginally posted by axl Quote
SMC DFA, SMC DFA WR, Tamron 90 (kind of unfair but sill...)
Mike P already did the gotcha moment thing so you can :Hand: regarding the D FA. However, The Tammy is a 90mm and as I pointed out earlier, it depends on which one you want to compare given there are about 10 of them with varying optical formulae and AF or mf. The current production model 90mm is longer by 2mm than the Sigma and nearly as heavy. As I already pointed out, I have the 52B and 52BB and the 52B is compact but heavy. With the 1:1 tube, its bigger and heavier than my Sigma 105mm plus its 15mm shorter. I actually have the adaptall 2x on it and use it as a 180mm macro. I went through all of this when I had to replace my Viv S1. I was making the comparisons of potential replacements at the time to the Viv and Nikkor and basically everthing was smaller than either of those 2.
10-20-2010, 02:47 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Egg Salad's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 337
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Tommot1965 Quote
Id like a sigma 70-200 OS HSM..the new version..quite expensive at the MO..but some very good reviews and high IQ from tests Ive seen so far

Id question your compulsion in Keeping your Lenses " clean" as in only one manufacturer in your kit bag ...its been my experience so far that every so often a manufacturer will produce a freak lens,,that is affordable and pin sharp....just cause it aint a sigma shouldn't stop you considering it....you may very well be doing yourself a injustice
I'm not a lens racist. If there was a lens that is really good and a bargain but not a Sigma that wouldn't stop me from getting it. I'm not that strict. It's just that I like the same design (control layout and looks) on all my lenses. Ok, actually even Sigma failed here. 3 different lenses and everyone of these is slightly different (ribbing, paint).


A general thing to adress:
Comparing Sigma's Lenses to Pentax' counterparts, the Sigma option is - except for the FA* series (2/24, 1.4/85, 70-200,...) - always bigger. In cases like 1.4/50 vs 1.4/50 or 1.4/85 vs 1.8/77 the difference in size is ridiculous. But luckily for me, I like hefty lenses so this in no drawback to me.

Last edited by Egg Salad; 10-20-2010 at 03:08 PM.
10-20-2010, 05:10 PM   #27
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
The Sigma 85/1.5 is gi-normous compared to the FA 77mm/1.8 ltd.

86.4 x 87.6 mm and 745 grams compared to 64 x 48mm and 270 grams. It is still a fairly compact lens though nearly 2 pounds. I am curious if anyone has tried it on a film body or ff Nikon dslr.
it would be available for the Nikon and K-mount next mount. I'm curious as well on how this lens would work out for the Nikon and Pentax.

size is the only thing that is holding up for the Pentax which I like. although the Sigma is enormous, I guess I can live with it as long as it has AF.
10-21-2010, 06:24 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 821
QuoteOriginally posted by mugund Quote
I am debating between sigma 30mm f1.4 Versus Sigma 28mm f1.8
I don't have the 28mm, only the 30mm so I can't compare them and doesn't have personal experience with the 28mm. What I can tell is that I'm absolutely satisfied with the 30mm. Excellent IQ even wide open, I mostly use it in the 1.4-2.2 range, bokeh is also nice for me. I don't really care about the extreme borders and corners since I never put my subject there so things are already out of focus there.
10-21-2010, 08:41 AM   #29
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by simico Quote
I don't have the 28mm, only the 30mm so I can't compare them and doesn't have personal experience with the 28mm. What I can tell is that I'm absolutely satisfied with the 30mm. Excellent IQ even wide open, I mostly use it in the 1.4-2.2 range, bokeh is also nice for me. I don't really care about the extreme borders and corners since I never put my subject there so things are already out of focus there.

Yep, I've said it before, the Sigma 30 is one of the most unfairly maligned lenses I know of. I had one and probably shouldn't have sold it (at least it's being cared for by a fellow forum member). It gets knocked for it's corner softness but I honestly think that for that lens, its kind of a plus. It really helps isolate your subject and I agree that it produces quite nice bokeh. If you're shooting something that requires corner-to-corner sharpness, use another lens. It's small and affordable, too!
10-21-2010, 09:32 AM   #30
Veteran Member
soppy's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Gainesville
Posts: 348
My ideal setup is also beginning to become sigma focused. The 24-70 2.8 EX is stuck in my head, but the 10-20mm 3.5 HSM will probably be my next buy. I would love to get one of their 105mm macro's but I'm just starting in macro, so not quite yet. And eventually, I'l like the 70-200 (300?) tele-zoom for the occasions when it is necessary. Now I just need to figure out how to buy it all on a college budget lol

P.S. Hello Christmas and Birthday.... Even if this is enough money to cover every Christmas I will have while in school lol
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
bag, bravo, dg, experience, focus, k-mount, lens, macro, pentax, pentax lens, service, sigma, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: K20D, D-BG2 grip, Sigma 17-70, Sigma 10-20, SMC Takumar 1000mm deadwolfbones Sold Items 23 10-21-2009 02:57 PM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax Lens Blowout; 50mm 1.4, Sigma 10-20mm, Sigma 400mm, etc. nufenstein Sold Items 13 03-30-2009 12:00 PM
For Sale - Sold: FS: FA 77mm limited, Sigma 17-70mm DC Macro, Sigma 70-300mm APO DG chemxaj Sold Items 10 03-17-2008 08:55 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:00 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top