This almost make sme wish that I had a direct same sensor comparison between the two different variations of the Sigma lens'. From what I can tell of the end result pics though... The Sigma 3.5 looks better; even when viewing an 11x14 screen image unmagnified.
Sure it is a bit of a disadvantage to have such a large front end filter, but that's also the major advantage - in optics. Not only the larger front end optics but also the dual eld's and the slightly better aperature. But also even if lighting conditions did allow for near identical comparison - the 3.5 is also faster at focusing. About the only other minor disadvantage is the fact that the lens cannot quite handle the full frame of a film camera, but it is terribly close on that one.
Or how about an even more interesting comparison... Comparing the Sigma 10-20mm (constant aperature through the zoom range) f3.5 to the Pentax labeled 10-17... The Sigma wins on four counts - better optically, better constant aperature, faster focusing, and better build quality.
Also noting - if you are able to wait - this is almost the exact focal length range that Sigma will eventually release in a full frame lens, but at a considerably higher price - most likely 1k++ in price
|