Photoclubalpha

I've written a report on the 70-200mm HSM II now:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/07/1 ... -macro-ii/

A report on the Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM will follow soon. Advance warning: this lens blows away the Sony/Tamron 18-250mm. It is staggeringly good. Imagine a lens with ZERO geometric distortion when used at minimum focus of 1:3.4 at 250mm - and barely visible distortion on distant subjects at 250mm. Plus perfect centre sharpness wide open at 250mm.

It's a big beast, and the zoom action is stiff and difficult with a 'lump' in the middle which is affected by gravity if you point the lens up or down. But where the Sony design is soft at 250mm and really needs stopping own to at least f/8 and preferably f/11, the Sigma is fully usable wide open at f/6.3 and stopping down just helps bring the corners in better.

David

Thanks, David. Have you had any further thoughts about the Sigma 24-70 HSM? Others have been very complimentary but you clearly differed.

Good reading, thank you David. Did you try it out with the matched HSM-compatible 2X or 1.4X converters, I would be interested in knowing about performance fall-off.

I hope the review, and pix, made it clear I used the 2X HSM converter and results from that are excellent.

I have not used the 1.4X.

David

Ewannawe wrote:Good reading, thank you David. Did you try it out with the matched HSM-compatible 2X or 1.4X converters, I would be interested in knowing about performance fall-off.

We need maybe to have another look at it. We sent two sampes back to Sigma with image files showing an uneven fall off - one side of the frame unsharp,

But my Km 28-75mm does exactly the same thing, one side unsharp. I may try a Sony sample in due course, we have only tested Nikon so far.

David

David Kilpatrick wrote:A report on the Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM will follow soon. Advance warning: this lens blows away the Sony/Tamron 18-250mm. It is staggeringly good. Imagine a lens with ZERO geometric distortion when used at minimum focus of 1:3.4 at 250mm - and barely visible distortion on distant subjects at 250mm. Plus perfect centre sharpness wide open at 250mm.

In your earlier posts about this lens it seemed like you thought that optically it was only a bit better than the Sony and the OS was not as good as SSS. It sounds like with more use your opinion has evolved. I am looking forward to seeing your review. This type of lens is not for everyone, but for the way I shoot and backpack travel I like them. Naturally, if optically they get better then I am interested.

Hi David

Would a upgrade from a older Sigma 70-200 APO EX give visible better quality or better handling?

It would give a shorter minimum focussing distance (from 1.8m to 1m) and HSM (quieter).

Would it be faster focussing on a A700 / A900?

David Kilpatrick wrote:I've written a report on the 70-200mm HSM II now:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/07/1 ... -macro-ii/

A report on the Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM will follow soon.
David

Hi David.
I heard the Sony 18-250 has a slow AF though faster than the Tamron equivalent. How's the Sigma holding up ?

For some reason I still fancy the tamron one more, maybe that's my slightly Sigma cautious nature.

Still both are well priced and look good on an optical level, and loads cheaper than the Sony one.
Might have to add one of these soon. It's an obvious gap in my line-up

David Kilpatrick wrote:I hope the review, and pix, made it clear I used the 2X HSM converter and results from that are excellent.

I have not used the 1.4X.

David

It did indeed make it clear, right after the point where I stopped reading. That will teach me to read a full report before asking questions, or it should!

Could you comment on wether a decent (not top end) 400mm Prime lens would be sharper? I want to buy a larger zoom but having just given up with the kit lens that came with my A200 and ordered a Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 for £250.00, (thought it was an excellent price), it will be at least a year before I can consider my long zoom, a converter may be a stop gap alternative on my 70-200 which I'm very happy with.

bakubo wrote:

David Kilpatrick wrote:A report on the Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM will follow soon. Advance warning: this lens blows away the Sony/Tamron 18-250mm. It is staggeringly good. Imagine a lens with ZERO geometric distortion when used at minimum focus of 1:3.4 at 250mm - and barely visible distortion on distant subjects at 250mm. Plus perfect centre sharpness wide open at 250mm.

In your earlier posts about this lens it seemed like you thought that optically it was only a bit better than the Sony and the OS was not as good as SSS. It sounds like with more use your opinion has evolved. I am looking forward to seeing your review. This type of lens is not for everyone, but for the way I shoot and backpack travel I like them. Naturally, if optically they get better then I am interested.

My opinion was such that we took the Sony to Venice. I then had the job of processing the images from the Sony in Venice, and I was not happy. My fault - I had not warned Shirley to move off program although she was using 320 ISO. I thought that would ensure the lens was not at f/6.3 all the time. It does not. She should have been on A and f/8.

The f/6.3, 250mm results were barely usable (remember, we are upscaling to 17 megapixels) and cropping was not an option, they were simply too soft. So I checked the Sigma deliberately at 250mm and f/6.3 on a lot of subjects, and the difference was huge. Basically the Sigma is sharp, very sharp, at that setting; the Sony as we know is soft at 250mm and wide open, though it sharpens up a lot when stopped down just a bit.

David

Ewannawe wrote:

David Kilpatrick wrote:I hope the review, and pix, made it clear I used the 2X HSM converter and results from that are excellent.

I have not used the 1.4X.

David

It did indeed make it clear, right after the point where I stopped reading. That will teach me to read a full report before asking questions, or it should!

Could you comment on wether a decent (not top end) 400mm Prime lens would be sharper? I want to buy a larger zoom but having just given up with the kit lens that came with my A200 and ordered a Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 for £250.00, (thought it was an excellent price), it will be at least a year before I can consider my long zoom, a converter may be a stop gap alternative on my 70-200 which I'm very happy with.

There are no 'decent, not top end' 400mm prime lenses now. No such thing exists. It's zoom, or Nikon/Canon. No Sony, nothing else. No Sigma prime even these days.

David

lock wrote:

David Kilpatrick wrote:I've written a report on the 70-200mm HSM II now:

http://www.photoclubalpha.com/2009/07/1 ... -macro-ii/

A report on the Sigma 18-250mm DC OS HSM will follow soon.
David

Hi David.
I heard the Sony 18-250 has a slow AF though faster than the Tamron equivalent. How's the Sigma holding up ?

It's HSM. Much faster. The Sony is not bad but of course HSM wins.

David

David, did you test it on a Nikon mount or Sony mount camera ? I couldn't really get that out of your text.

lock

A very interesting review David. I like your idea of using the Sigma 70-200 2.8 + TC as an alternative to the Sony 70-300 G. Looking forward to to the 18-250 review.