Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Zebooka · 04-13-2010, 07:29 AM

Thread about Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS stabilized!

Does anyone have it? Or tested? How good it is?

I'm considering it as animal/wild-life tele zoom. Optical stab. will help a lot in tracking moving objects.

Jodokast96 · 04-13-2010, 08:42 AM

Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR.

Zebooka · 04-13-2010, 08:56 PM

Originally posted by Jodokast96

Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR.

optical (lens based) stabilizer is known to be better at long tele range than sensor based ones. Also, it provides photographer comfortable tracking of subject without terrible shaking of picture in viewfinder.

Cheers

PS: I think I'll buy it. And report here the results and test shots. Some people on other forums reported it is much sharper that 70-300 lenses without OS.

jct us101 · 04-13-2010, 08:58 PM

I've actually been a lot more curious about the Sigma 50-200mm that was announced not too long ago but then never mentioned again. I would love to get that lens instead though.

flippedgazelle · 04-13-2010, 09:47 PM

Originally posted by Jodokast96

Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR.

Well, the OS version has a different optical formula than the current APO version, so there is hope that it's in the same ballpark as the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness.

Just from personal usage, I've found that P&S with OIS (Canon) gives better SR than CCD-shift IS (Casio, Fuji). However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick.

Zebooka · 04-13-2010, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by flippedgazelle

However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick.

Totally agree for wide-angle.
I looked through Canon 40D + 17-55/2.8 IS USM. It is terrible.

lurchlarson · 04-13-2010, 11:03 PM

The image quality should be fine. But I tend to agree that the OS won't do much. The two systems work about as well as the other.

KjetilH · 04-14-2010, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by Zebooka

optical (lens based) stabilizer is known to be better at long tele range than sensor based ones.

(...)

Out of curiousity, are there tests that confirm this?
The common argument seems to be that "VR/IS/OS/VC is suited to the lens itself, and is therefore more effective", but I have yet to see some numbers backing this up.

Regardless, it's nice to have the option, as well as it makes it easier for Sigma to release K-mount lenses.

Jodokast96 · 04-14-2010, 03:10 AM

Originally posted by flippedgazelle

Well, the OS version has a different optical formula than the current APO version, so there is hope that it's in the same ballpark as the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness.

Just from personal usage, I've found that P&S with OIS (Canon) gives better SR than CCD-shift IS (Casio, Fuji). However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick.

So unless it's optically better than the 55-300, why fall into the Canikon trap of spending hundreds more for a lens that gives you the same 2-4 stops extra that SR does? The one review I read was pretty disappointed with the OS capabilities of this lens anyway.

jct us101 · 04-15-2010, 12:58 AM

Yeah, I would have to say that the old Sigma 70-300mm lens might be an option too since you don't need the extra Shake Reduction, but I haven't really read any reviews about this lens so I don't know too much about the quality of it compared to the older one. The older one was nice and all about it really was just a beginners lens, not someone who would ever pixel peep.

Zebooka · 04-15-2010, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by jct us101

Yeah, I would have to say that the old Sigma 70-300mm lens might be an option too since you don't need the extra Shake Reduction, but I haven't really read any reviews about this lens so I don't know too much about the quality of it compared to the older one. The older one was nice and all about it really was just a beginners lens, not someone who would ever pixel peep.

The new one is sharper than old ones. It was shown on penta-club.ru
Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS - Ôîðóìû Ïåíòà-êëóáà

Also Optical Stabilizer is exactly what I need - I need stabilized picture in viewfinder for comfortable shooting.

Also Falk Lumo tested Sr here Falk Lumo: Pentax shake reduction revisited
It is not efficient at tele range as I've said.

Cheers

jct us101 · 04-15-2010, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by Zebooka

The new one is sharper than old ones. It was shown on penta-club.ru
Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS - Ôîðóìû Ïåíòà-êëóáà

Also Optical Stabilizer is exactly what I need - I need stabilized picture in viewfinder for comfortable shooting.

Also Falk Lumo tested Sr here Falk Lumo: Pentax shake reduction revisited
It is not efficient at tele range as I've said.

Cheers

If you have a Pentax DSLR that has built in Shake Reduction then it's going to turn off the lenses OS anyways, so it's kind of redundant for no reason.

Jodokast96 · 04-15-2010, 06:06 PM

You can use either (or even both).

Zebooka · 04-15-2010, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by jct us101

If you have a Pentax DSLR that has built in Shake Reduction then it's going to turn off the lenses OS anyways, so it's kind of redundant for no reason.

Who told you this?
You can always turn SR off and use OS in the lens.

jct us101 · 04-15-2010, 08:45 PM

Originally posted by Zebooka

Who told you this?
You can always turn SR off and use OS in the lens.

Someone on this forum, actually. I guess I should have looked for a second opinion. So if you just turn the cameras Shake Reduction off, the OS will work instead? Maybe the person meant that you can't use them both at the same time, which would make a lot more sense. I assume that you can't use them both at the same time? That would be a little redundant, wouldn't it?

04-13-2010, 07:29 AM	#1
Zebooka Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk Posts: 323	Sigma 70-300mm/4.0-5.6 DG OS Thread about Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS stabilized! Does anyone have it? Or tested? How good it is? I'm considering it as animal/wild-life tele zoom. Optical stab. will help a lot in tracking moving objects.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax 55-300mm versus Sigma 70-300mm DG APO Macro	mazdamazda	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	49	07-27-2010 12:46 AM
Tamron AF 70-300mm or Sigma Lens 70-300mm or Sigma 70-200mm	Ben Hunt	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	21	11-05-2008 05:47 AM
Sigma 100-300mm f/4 versus Pentax DA* 300mm f/4	Tbear	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	03-26-2008 07:24 PM
If you had a choice: Sigma 300mm f/2.8 EX DG vs. Pentax FA* 300mm f/2.8 ED IF [NOS?]	m8o	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	07-27-2007 07:27 AM

04-13-2010, 08:42 AM	#2
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR.

04-13-2010, 08:56 PM	#3
Zebooka Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk Posts: 323 Original Poster	Originally posted by Jodokast96 Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR. optical (lens based) stabilizer is known to be better at long tele range than sensor based ones. Also, it provides photographer comfortable tracking of subject without terrible shaking of picture in viewfinder. Cheers PS: I think I'll buy it. And report here the results and test shots. Some people on other forums reported it is much sharper that 70-300 lenses without OS.

04-13-2010, 08:58 PM	#4
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	I've actually been a lot more curious about the Sigma 50-200mm that was announced not too long ago but then never mentioned again. I would love to get that lens instead though.

04-13-2010, 09:47 PM	#5
flippedgazelle Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: NJ, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,270	Originally posted by Jodokast96 Unless it's optically better (doubt it) than the previous version, I don't see OS giving a big (if any) advantage over SR. Well, the OS version has a different optical formula than the current APO version, so there is hope that it's in the same ballpark as the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness. Just from personal usage, I've found that P&S with OIS (Canon) gives better SR than CCD-shift IS (Casio, Fuji). However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick.

04-13-2010, 10:53 PM	#6
Zebooka Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk Posts: 323 Original Poster	Originally posted by flippedgazelle However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick. Totally agree for wide-angle. I looked through Canon 40D + 17-55/2.8 IS USM. It is terrible.

04-13-2010, 11:03 PM	#7
lurchlarson Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Oregon, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 681	The image quality should be fine. But I tend to agree that the OS won't do much. The two systems work about as well as the other.

04-14-2010, 01:02 AM	#8
KjetilH Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Oslo Photos: Gallery Posts: 309	Originally posted by Zebooka optical (lens based) stabilizer is known to be better at long tele range than sensor based ones. (...) Out of curiousity, are there tests that confirm this? The common argument seems to be that "VR/IS/OS/VC is suited to the lens itself, and is therefore more effective", but I have yet to see some numbers backing this up. Regardless, it's nice to have the option, as well as it makes it easier for Sigma to release K-mount lenses.

04-14-2010, 03:10 AM	#9
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	Originally posted by flippedgazelle Well, the OS version has a different optical formula than the current APO version, so there is hope that it's in the same ballpark as the Pentax 55-300 in terms of sharpness. Just from personal usage, I've found that P&S with OIS (Canon) gives better SR than CCD-shift IS (Casio, Fuji). However, watching the image floating around in the Canon's OVF made me vaguely seasick. So unless it's optically better than the 55-300, why fall into the Canikon trap of spending hundreds more for a lens that gives you the same 2-4 stops extra that SR does? The one review I read was pretty disappointed with the OS capabilities of this lens anyway.

04-15-2010, 12:58 AM	#10
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Yeah, I would have to say that the old Sigma 70-300mm lens might be an option too since you don't need the extra Shake Reduction, but I haven't really read any reviews about this lens so I don't know too much about the quality of it compared to the older one. The older one was nice and all about it really was just a beginners lens, not someone who would ever pixel peep.

04-15-2010, 08:31 AM	#11
Zebooka Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk Posts: 323 Original Poster	Originally posted by jct us101 Yeah, I would have to say that the old Sigma 70-300mm lens might be an option too since you don't need the extra Shake Reduction, but I haven't really read any reviews about this lens so I don't know too much about the quality of it compared to the older one. The older one was nice and all about it really was just a beginners lens, not someone who would ever pixel peep. The new one is sharper than old ones. It was shown on penta-club.ru Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS - Ôîðóìû Ïåíòà-êëóáà Also Optical Stabilizer is exactly what I need - I need stabilized picture in viewfinder for comfortable shooting. Also Falk Lumo tested Sr here Falk Lumo: Pentax shake reduction revisited It is not efficient at tele range as I've said. Cheers

04-15-2010, 04:19 PM	#12
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Originally posted by Zebooka The new one is sharper than old ones. It was shown on penta-club.ru Sigma 70-300/4.0-5.6 DG OS - Ôîðóìû Ïåíòà-êëóáà Also Optical Stabilizer is exactly what I need - I need stabilized picture in viewfinder for comfortable shooting. Also Falk Lumo tested Sr here Falk Lumo: Pentax shake reduction revisited It is not efficient at tele range as I've said. Cheers If you have a Pentax DSLR that has built in Shake Reduction then it's going to turn off the lenses OS anyways, so it's kind of redundant for no reason.

04-15-2010, 06:06 PM	#13
Jodokast96 Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Erial, NJ USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,134	You can use either (or even both).

04-15-2010, 08:26 PM	#14
Zebooka Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Russia, Siberia, Novosibirsk Posts: 323 Original Poster	Originally posted by jct us101 If you have a Pentax DSLR that has built in Shake Reduction then it's going to turn off the lenses OS anyways, so it's kind of redundant for no reason. Who told you this? You can always turn SR off and use OS in the lens.

04-15-2010, 08:45 PM	#15
jct us101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Rohnert Park, CA Posts: 3,793	Originally posted by Zebooka Who told you this? You can always turn SR off and use OS in the lens. Someone on this forum, actually. I guess I should have looked for a second opinion. So if you just turn the cameras Shake Reduction off, the OS will work instead? Maybe the person meant that you can't use them both at the same time, which would make a lot more sense. I assume that you can't use them both at the same time? That would be a little redundant, wouldn't it?

Sigma 70-300mm/4.0-5.6 DG OS

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!