[robtcorl]

I think that I have the same lens in MF, with the A setting, non APO.
It's not great, but not too bad either.
Haven't really put it through the paces yet.

A couple of my first test shots with the K-5 (easier for me to nail focus with focus peaking on the K-01)




Here it is on my Q, but I can't find my test pics using it.

[ChopperCharles]

Tried reducing exposure, and that works to some extent, but then I have an underexposed photo, and the added noise inherent to that.

In some situations it appears reasonably sharp, in others not so much. (The further away the target is, the sharper it seems to be. Anything near minimum focus distance is not particularly sharp). I'm going to give it a try for moon shots (the reason i bought it, as my MF ability is severely lacking), and on my Q as well. (But I don't hold a lot of hope for decent Q IQ). So, my LBA got the best of me. Oh well, live and learn.

Charles.

[Lloydy]

That's some nasty fringing, some of the worst I've seen- and I've got a world class collection of crap lenses. But it's easy to fix, just knock the magenta out in Photoshop - desaturate it. I took some of the blue out as well. It saves a picture, but ideally you want to shoot without it, and that's going to be down to getting out and testing the lens with real world tests. For fringing I like trees without leaves and TV antennas, keep changing apertures and chimping, there will likely be a sweet spot. [IMG]
IMGP1919 modded par David Lloyd, on ipernity[/IMG]

[baro-nite]

Wow, that is some luscious purple. At f/8, no less. Any better if you stop down further? I have the Pentax-A equivalent and find it to be best stopped down to f/11.

[calculator01]

Another reason not to trust the review section without reading well in between the lines. A lens like this should not be a 7.33, just like no lens should be a 10. But I guess everyone is entitled to randomly choose their numbers and assign as they see fit. (How you can rate sharpness an 9, aberrations an 8, handling an 8, etc and somehow give the lens a 10... sigh...)

Anyhow, I feel your pain about your lens. I have a lens that produces ever so slightly better than your Sigma. On digital, it is nasty. On film, it is extra superb though.

[dansamy]

When I read the title, my first thought was "how do you not know you've bought a dog?" Then, I figured out you were referring to a lens! Not a canine.

I'm sorry that your purchase is a bum one. Hopefully, you didn't spend a lot. I am buying a good bit of stuff from eBay. I try not to spend a lot so that it won't be terribly cringe worthy when I get that bummer of a buy.

I do use the lens database here a lot, but as mentioned above, you have to actually read some of the reviews. Sometimes, the ratings ate really skewed.

[Na Horuk]

Regarding purple fringing, there are some things you can do..
Many post processing software has a function for it. Purple fringing is a known problem for digital cameras, so software can try to remove it. It will be pretty successful, too, but you will have to shoot raw. Or you can selectively remove purple colours. This is the digital solution.

Mechanically, I have read that using a very strong UV filter can reduce purple fringing. Of course, using a UV filter can lower IQ and cause other problems, and a good UV filter will cost quite a bit, but if you have one on hand, it might be worth the try. I can't guarantee this will work, though.
Using a narrower aperture and underexposing are your other options, but this is often not a good solution. Still, if you shoot raw (or enable shadow correction, highlight correction) you can digitally brighten the important parts later. Basically, there are many tradeoffs, so you have to weigh the options.
And you should always use the lens hood btw, that is the first step that can improve IQ with older lenses. Tripod can also help with sharpness, especially since its a tele lens.

[Not a Number]

Of course, using a UV filter can lower IQ and cause other problems,

Protective Shields? Mr. Spock... Bones... What would you do?

[ChopperCharles]

I actually find the sharpness to be pretty good, it's the fringing I have an issue with. And I never use UV filters, and all my shots were taken with the hood. (It's built-in, after all)

I'm still playing with it. i need to compare it against my 55-300. I will say it blows my mirror lens out of the water as far as sharpness is concerned. Hands down, no contest.

Somehow raw files have less fringing than the jpegs, and then I can adjust the rest out with lightroom sliders. There is no lens profile for this sucker though, unfortunately.

Will post a review once I really have put it through paces.

Charles.

[Kerrowdown]

I think I bought a dog.

Remember that "A dog is for life, not just for Christmas"

[dansamy]

Remember that "A dog is for life, not just for Christmas"

That's VERY true! A dog is a living, breathing, thinking, feeling creature. They're not any more disposable than children are.

[Kerrowdown]

They're not any more disposable than children are

Aye but the were times when my girls were growing up, I'd have swapped them for a broken Dyson vacuum.

[dansamy]

Aye but the were times when my girls were growing up, I'd have swapped them for a broken Dyson vacuum.

Lol! My daughter & youngest son sometimes make me wish my eldest was an only.

[Kerrowdown]

make me wish my eldest was an only

Aye, we blame the long dark cold winter nights, where we all go to bed early to keep warm...

[dansamy]

Aye, we blame the long dark cold winter nights, where we all go to bed early to keep warm...

There aren't any long, cold winter nights in Alabama...