Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 II EX DG APO Macro HSM

[chmodx]

Hi,

I've had one of these lenses on my Alpha since November. It is great, I'd avoid using any teleconverters, AF tends to go a little crazy, it does the "range" cycle when using one instead of picking up focus right away. Even in bright sunlight, the teleconverter makes the lens very soft. Post up some test shots.

[David Kilpatrick]

The new HSM-compatible Sigma 2X converter has few problems. Focus is a bit fast, and the lack of a limiter is not welcome, but it works.

David

[coen van dijk]

Last saterday I went to shop for a tele lens...

Compared the Tamron SP AF70-200mm F/2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro model A001 and the Sigma APO 70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG MACRO HSM.

A shot at about 100 meters or more to the other side of the parking space full open at 2.8, 200 mm and 1/2000 at 100 asa, with my one year old Sony A200 at 16:17 hour.

The Tamron:


The Sigma:


continued to next message...

[Dr. Harout]

Nice input Coen and welcome to the forum.
Though downsized, I see the Sigma has better sharpness.

[coen van dijk]

At 16:37 and 16:39 I shot this car at 2.8, 70 mm, 1/400 and 100 asa

The Tamron:


The Sigma:


Continued to next message...

[coen van dijk]

but before that I shot this black car at 2.8, 70 mm, 1/1000, iso 100 at 16:12 and 16:14 hour.

The Tamron:


The Sigma:


And here the yellow cast is obvious, allthough on the A200 display not that much as on my computer monitor...

Later today I shot a few at 18:15 hour, so without strong sun shine on a black Jaguar, allmost identical colour. A few BMW's, green, beige and black, also identical. I will try to shoot some at noon and later afternoon to see how much influence the sun really has. It could be that a late afternoon sun gives that golden glow more pronounced on a Sigma than a Tamron... I'm not sure and still puzzled...

In the original of the building, I saw that sharpness is almost identical. See the number 8 at the number plate of that silver VW on the right or any of the bricks on the building. Is this an exeptional sharp Sigma lens or was the Tamron not that good? I really do not know.

[coen van dijk]

Hmm, the pictures of the cars are quite big... I did resize them at photobucket just as the picture of the building. If it is still that big tomorow, I will resize them again and edit my message.

In the meantime please post your comments to the two lenses...

I did choose the Sigma btw, shot a concert on sunday of Dana Fuchs under bad light conditions. Did a concert last wednesday with better light with the Tamron 55-200 and realised I needed a faster lens then... But with the bad light on sunday, I gained not that much... Offcourse the 55-200 would be worse on sunday, if not (almost) unusable...

[coen van dijk]

okee, another pair...

shot today 16:07 and 16:08 hour at 2.8, 75 mm, 1/1000, iso 100

The Tamron 28-75:


The Sigma 70-200:


I just hope the colour rendition of the Tamron 28-75 is the same as on their 70-200... If I had to buy both the Tamron 70-200 and Sigma 70-200, the remaining 200 Euro's would not be that much for a usefull Focus Limiter on the Sony 70-200

Oh well....

Comments are most welcome.

[David Kilpatrick]

Coen:

Any lens which uses extra low dispersion (simulated fluorite) elements may have a colour cast, relative to a lens using fewer SLD, ELD or hybrid aspheric elements.

In the past, Minolta used different coatings to 'align' the colour transmission of their lens range. This sometimes meant having poor flare control, as in the 35-70mm f/4 and the 70-210mm f/4 beercan. Basically, they had to align all lenses with the worst in the range for colour and contrast - since you can't always improve a lens, if you want identical transmission characteristics, it may be necessary to 'un-improve' all the rest to match.

Zeiss and Nikon never tried to do this, but Leica did. Then they all started using new types of glass, and even Leica had to accept that new lenses would not match old ones. Eventually, all the makers accepted that lenses might have different colour transmission and contrast, if every lens had the most efficient coating to reduce flare without radically shifting colour balance.

The myth about Sigma lenses being yellower is mainly because people tend to buy certain Sigma lenses which aim for apo correction, like the 70-200mm design. It would odd if Sigma lenses were all yellow - they make half the Olympus 4/3rds range after all and no-one says all those are yellow!

Anyway, digital cameras mean that adjustments can be made freely to remove any apparent cast.

So I never worry whether I have a 1a, a 1b, a UV or no filter on any particular lens - or what make lens I am using. I can always achieve neutral colour from my raw files. I do prefer UV filters but for example we had a Minolta original Haze 1A 72mm and that went on the Sigma 18-250mm rather than buy a new filter.

David