[Photobuddy25]

Hello everyone,

I managed to snap up one of the few remaining Sigma 70-200mm lenses in stock, after checking with a number of local and online reatilers. I purchased my copy through Paxtons Photographics in Chatswood, NSW and a cursory call to some their other branches indicates that they still may have some available. FYI Paxton's stores are located in the Sydney metropolitan area only, although you can purchase online, here is the link - Paxtons |[name]=Sigma-70-200mm-F2.8-EX-DG-OS-HSM-for-Pentax-Lenses---SLR-%26-Compact-System&catalog[product_guids][0]=753362

No movement on price I'm afraid, so I am paying mine off in instalments.

Hope this helps !

Regards,
Chris

[munch008]

I have a Sigma 70-200 F.28. For indoor sports like hockey it is the only lens that I would consider. I purchased the Tamron first at a local camera store and it just does not focus fast enough to shoot hockey. The image quality is better with the Tamron. If you are shooting weddings it would be an outstanding lens for the price. But for Hockey you need the focus speed. The pic attached is with a K-30 and the Sigma.

[richardwong]

munch008 - Thanks for the information, question, did you shoot this behind glass, is that why the shot seems a bit noisy because of the plexiglass?

I have a Sigma 70-200 F.28. For indoor sports like hockey it is the only lens that I would consider. I purchased the Tamron first at a local camera store and it just does not focus fast enough to shoot hockey. The image quality is better with the Tamron. If you are shooting weddings it would be an outstanding lens for the price. But for Hockey you need the focus speed. The pic attached is with a K-30 and the Sigma.

[Sqideyes]

Thank you Chris. I have been trying to buy this lens for the last couple of weeks and have had no joy(I am in WA). But thanks to your post I have just purchased one from Paxtons.

Cheers Bob.

[stevebrot]

The DA 12-24, DA 35 Ltd Macro, & D FA 100 Macro were all collaborations with Tokina.

I forgot to include the DA 12-24 (my bad) and was unaware of any collaboration on the DA 35 or the D FA 100 Macro. Did Tokina sell versions of those last two under their own label?


Steve

[munch008]

munch008 - Thanks for the information, question, did you shoot this behind glass, is that why the shot seems a bit noisy because of the plexiglass?

Richard,
Yes I was shooting through the glass. This particular arena is very poorly lit and very cold. Also I'm not very good at P.P. I know there are noise reduction programs available I just have not purchased on yet. The photo below is what it is capable of when not shooting through the glass, K-30, Sigma 70-200 F 2.8 ISO 1600, Shutter speed 1/320 sec Focal length 200 MM. This image is cropped

[munch008]

Sorry forgot to attach the image

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

File Date

 

[boriscleto]

I forgot to include the DA 12-24 (my bad) and was unaware of any collaboration on the DA 35 or the D FA 100 Macro. Did Tokina sell versions of those last two under their own label?


Steve

Tokina AF 35mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro DX (Nikon) - Review / Test Report

Tokina AF 100mm f/2.8 AT-X Pro D macro - Review / Test Report

Tokina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As of March 2009, the six lenses co-developed and released in both Tokina and Pentax versions are the AT-X Pro 12-24mm f/4.0, AT-X Pro 16-50mm f/2.8, AT-X Pro 50-135mm f/2.8, AT-X 10-17mm f/3.5-4.5 fisheye, AT-X Pro 100mm /2.8 macro, and AT-X Pro 35mm f/2.8 macro. The last Tokina lens released before the collaboration was the 28-70mm f/2.8, in 2002. The currently available Tokina own-designed lenses are the 11-16mm f/2.8, 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6, 16.5-135mm f/3.5-5.6 and 28-80mm f/2.8.

[richardwong]

munch008 - this pic is much better, darn plexiglass sometimes.

Sorry forgot to attach the image

[noelpolar]

I bought the latest OS HSM version late last year......fabulous lens.....size aside

a picture of some ancient sport taken with it....

[richardwong]

Nice looking terracotta warriors NoelPolar.

[robjmitchell]

Ya, but I'm hoping for WR. Probably won't happen, and it would be a DA* without the mount seal.

I really want WR.

And I want no water splashes in my $2000 lens even more.

Noser,
AW designation means all weather. It includes dust and water sealing and offers a higher level of water resistance than WR.
So far only the da560 and 645 lenses have AW.
All the DA* lenses have the equivalent level although its not designated. instead its in the specs.
The new lens is designated as a * lens so it will be weather sealed pro quality and logically f2.8.
It's also a teaser that FF is probably less than a decade away!

[JimmyDranox]

Noser,
It's also a teaser that FF is probably less than a decade away!

That's great. Maybe I will still be alive when this FF will come

[nkull]

This is not good... Really upsetting. I was looking to get one soon for sports shooting and I will buy a Nikon body before I bend over backwards paying stupid prices for used. The thing that really sucks about that is it leaves me with a dilemma, I would have liked the 70-200 on a cropped body, in the past I would have only considered Nikon to go FF, ugh...

Pentax will not survive without 3rd party lens support, the idea that Pentax will have a more expensive version of it sometime in the future is not enough. My camera body is useless if I can't get the good glass for it that can meet the various needs photographers have, and paying 2x as much for a Pentax lens is not the correct answer.

[cyberjunkie]

Pentax will not survive without 3rd party lens support, the idea that Pentax will have a more expensive version of it sometime in the future is not enough. My camera body is useless if I can't get the good glass for it that can meet the various needs photographers have, and paying 2x as much for a Pentax lens is not the correct answer.

I wholeheartedly concur.
But... you see just a part of the whole picture.
It is true that the Hoya property nearly killed Pentax (i still remember LOTS of fanboys on this forum defending them), and that the lack of Tokina lenses in Pentax mount has been a shame (Tokinas are the best 3rd party lenses as far as mechanical build is concerned). It is also true that Sigma is either retiring, or not releasing at all, some of their best objectives in Pentax attachment.
We'll see how the Ricoh property will do, at the moment it is too early to say anything. IMHO, to regain a place between the major players there are three points which are necessary (but not sufficient, "the market" is a weird, unstable divinity): 1) a good, innovative FF body, soon!, to reinforce the brand 2) a better line-up of lenses, priced to sell (with a few fast primes) 3) a good cheap body, sold at a loss, to regain access to the big sale chains. At the same time Pentax must keep up with the good work already done, with in-body stabilization (improved for panning?), compatibility with old lenses (uncrippled mount in the FF?... it won't cannibalize the new ones, and would be a strong selling point) and specializing (and advertising!) as an outdoor/wildlife brand (all/most lens line-up upgraded to WR?). All that would win back the favor of 3rd party lensmakers.

Having said all that - everybody on this forum spoke up his own mind about the issue, at least once... and i've never done it before - ....we're talking about the present, isn't it?
If i were up to buying my first DSLR, as the ordinary inexperienced user, i'd probably buy Nikon. Unfortunately for Nikon i'm not inexperienced, i can't stand mainstream, and before buying my first digital reflex i already had a good selection of the best Pentax lenses. So for me it has been a no-brainer.
Even considering to start from scratch, and even just taking into account the availability of lenses, it would be a tough call. I like travel photography. In-body SR and affordable WR zooms perfectly fit that kind of photography.
If you like to shoot sports, why not Canon?
Whatever... as far as lens availability is concerned, if we look at the situation, NOW, i don't think it's as dark as it's painted. Even excluding the immense number of M42 and mechanical P/K objectives, if you really want AF there is still hope! If you're not affected by some sort of compulsive buying syndrome, a healthy dose of patience and a bit of common sense can be quite helpful. Add a few stroke of luck and you got all it's needed!
I was following this thread cause one of the very few lenses i miss is a good f/2.8 AF zoom in the 70/80mm to 200/210mm range. For the moment i've decided to stick to my trusty Tokina MF until i find a better AF alternative, second-hand and very reasonably priced.
Personally i'm not concerned by new lenses, as far as i remember i bought only ONE new (non-kit) lens. An old Sigma 180mm Apo Macro MF. Most of my cameras, and all lenses but one, were purchased second-hand. I concede that some of the best primes were acquired when the prices were extremely favorable, and that i am not considering inflaction, but i am almost sure that none of the lenses in the list that follows, was payed more than 250 euros.
I have a list cause i had the silly idea to include all my 35mm/digital lenses in my signature. The character limit is reached too soon, so i decided to make a jpeg. To make it readable the size exceeds the limit, so i had to renounce ....but i still have the list.
Take it as an example of what can be acquired with plenty of dedication, a whole lot of patience, some common sense and a decent amount of knowledge. I don't like bragging, and i've been undecided about posting it... then i decided that it's just a practical example, something that might encourage others to be considerate, and don't bend, backwards or in any other direction, if prices get out of control. It is the market god who dictates prices, well... now i remember, wait... we're the market! Nobody else but ourselves.

Pentax:
A 3.5/15; A 2.8/20; A 2.8/24; K 2/28; A 2/35; M 2.8/40; DA 2.8/40 Limited; M 1.4/50; A 1.7/50; F 2.8/50 macro; FA 4/28-70 AL; A* 1.4/85; K 2.2/85 Soft; M 4/100 bellows; K 2.5/135; A* 2.8/200; A* 2.8/300 + 2x & 1.4X L; A 3.5/35-105; F 3.5-4.5/35-135; DA 4-5.6/50-200 WR; A 4/70-210; F 4.5-5.6/100-300; DA 4-5.8/55-300; 1.7X AF; Pentax 67 4/120 Soft
Others:
Sigma 2.8/16 fisheye; Sigma 4-5.6/10-20; Sigma 2.8/28-70 AF; Sigma 2.8/70 Macro AF; Sigma Apo Macro 5.6/180; Sigma 4-5.6/70-300 Apo Macro; Tokina 3.5-4.5/20-35 AF; Tokina 2.8/80-200 MF; Tokina 4.5-5.6/80-400 AF; Tamron 2.8/17-50; Tamron 2.5/90 macro MF & AF; VarioZenitar-K 2.8-3.5/20-45; Industar-61 2.8/50 L/Z; Noflexar 4/200 & 4.5/135 Macro; Revuenon 1.2/50; Porst 1.2/55; Porst 1.8/135; Arsat 2.8/35 shift; Voigtlander Color-Ultron 1.8/50; Novoflex follow-focus heads (many); CZJ Sonnar 4/300; Pentacon 5.6/500; Kenko 2x Macro KA; Vivitar 2x KA

The Pentax-F 70-210 and the Pentax-F 85mm Soft are not present cause the former has a fungal infection that must be cleaned, and the latter is still in Japan (just purchased).
As far as i remember ALL my digital bodies but one (the K-5 II) were payed under or around the 250 euros limit. Even the only digital i bought new, the Ricoh-branded K-01, was payed about 240 euros, with kit lens, sealed (end of inventory, off Ebay, from the UK).
If i don't find the Sigma zoom second-hand, at a price i deem reasonable (depending on my current finances), i'll wait for a Tamron one, or for the AF version of my Tokina (which should be optically improved, hopefully). If i have to wait, i'll wait...

BTW, i have been waiting for very long the Pentax full frame. Then i decided it was time to stop being foolish and purchased two old digital bodies (K10D and K200D). I soon realized that i had placed too much faith in the improvement of AF technologies. It was not much better than with the K1p: almost useless in many conditions, good if the subject and the illumination are OK.
With the K-5 II there is some improvement, with the K-01 it is... well, let's forget about it At the price i payed, the K-01 is a must have, but has its strong points and its idiosyncrasies.
All that to say a very simple thing: AF is NOT a panacea.
In some cases there is nothing as a good MF technique. Preset focus, and.. click, shoot when the subject traps in.
In some other cases, birds or wildlife with busy background, a manual follow-focus like the Novoflex can't be beaten (if you take the time to learn how to properly operate the "trigger").
If you don't shoot mainly sports, and don't need a strong AF tracking performance, i see very few reasons to switch brand. Just think about all those P/K and M42 very fast primes... we're not talking pixel peeping, some of those old lenses have a distinctive optical signature, something i can't emulate in PP (maybe somebody can, but i'm too lazy to even think about it, it is already giving me an headache).
Sometimes i bend and go with the flow. I got the advice to buy the Pentax DA 55-300mm so many times... that i eventually bought one. Ebay, second-hand, like new.
I am on vacation with my bike, too little room for baggage, so i brought the K-01 and a few smallish lenses.
Two days ago i had to photograph the performance of a well known dutch singer, a very sexy and energetic girl She jumped all the time out of focus, in the end i had few real keepers.
I felt i missed a good fast MF zoom, with a well-damped, long-throw focusing ring. Prefocusing, and giving small manual adjustments, would have made my work easier.

So let's collectively mourn the demise of the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8, and let's hope that Ricoh doesn't follow the footsteps of Hoya.
Just don't say that, at this moment, it is a good reason to switch brand. I still see many reason to think the opposite, especially for the money-conscious advanced amateur.

Sorry for the long blurb. I thought that sometimes practical examples are the only way to go to the point, and make yourself understood

cheers

Paolo