4/3 Sigma 55-200 here !!!
- Thread starter hammer_400
- Start date
- Status
hammer_400
Senior Member
anyone looking for sigma 55-200? got one for sale in BST...
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=121899
http://forums.clubsnap.org/showthread.php?t=121899
hammer_400
Senior Member
nothing to do with image quality...
rather, i would prefer the oly feel ,like the kit lens, and a bigger zoom ring,
and the fly-by-wire focusing,...
and i dun mind sacrificing the space savings i get with the sigma...
other than that, the sigma can focus closer and has slightly more reach
rather, i would prefer the oly feel ,like the kit lens, and a bigger zoom ring,
and the fly-by-wire focusing,...
and i dun mind sacrificing the space savings i get with the sigma...
other than that, the sigma can focus closer and has slightly more reach
Hi hammer_400
This online guy provided a link for people to see the problem with his Sigma lens ... Now people is beginning to see why they should just stick to Oly digital lens over their competition. The Sigma lens is just not equal the image quality of the Oly Zuiko 40-150 lens.
Check this out below.
----------
spanky wrote:
How many others are unhappy with theirs?
Unhappy, yes, a bit. Mine is new, so I'm still learning how to use it. But it is definitely mushy at the long end; in effect, I could probably have bought the Olympus 40-150 mm and gotten better results at the 150 point as the Sigma produces. I think the long end is usable, but only with lots of sharpening. I uploaded a couple of comparison shots earlier today at myfourthirds:
http://forums.myfourthirds.com/viewtopic.php?t=106
----------
Posted by E B
Date/Time 1:30:22 PM, Sunday, April 17, 2005 (GMT)
Thinking of selling the Sigma 55-200... and buying the Oly 40-150. I just can seem to get sharp pictures at the long end with the Sigma, even with a tripod. But I am debating of getting the Sigma 18-125.
Any thoughts?
----------
Sorry, but all the Sigma lenses currently in 4/3 mounts are old 35mm film designs. They do not have the resolution to provide top notch results on smaller formats and they are not telecentric. Expect them to provide soft images. The edge to edge sharpness and high contrast and resolution of the Olympus lenses is what you get when you pay the extra money.
Good Shooting,
English Bob
----------
cheers,
Phil
This online guy provided a link for people to see the problem with his Sigma lens ... Now people is beginning to see why they should just stick to Oly digital lens over their competition. The Sigma lens is just not equal the image quality of the Oly Zuiko 40-150 lens.
Check this out below.
----------
spanky wrote:
How many others are unhappy with theirs?
Unhappy, yes, a bit. Mine is new, so I'm still learning how to use it. But it is definitely mushy at the long end; in effect, I could probably have bought the Olympus 40-150 mm and gotten better results at the 150 point as the Sigma produces. I think the long end is usable, but only with lots of sharpening. I uploaded a couple of comparison shots earlier today at myfourthirds:
http://forums.myfourthirds.com/viewtopic.php?t=106
----------
Posted by E B
Date/Time 1:30:22 PM, Sunday, April 17, 2005 (GMT)
Thinking of selling the Sigma 55-200... and buying the Oly 40-150. I just can seem to get sharp pictures at the long end with the Sigma, even with a tripod. But I am debating of getting the Sigma 18-125.
Any thoughts?
----------
Sorry, but all the Sigma lenses currently in 4/3 mounts are old 35mm film designs. They do not have the resolution to provide top notch results on smaller formats and they are not telecentric. Expect them to provide soft images. The edge to edge sharpness and high contrast and resolution of the Olympus lenses is what you get when you pay the extra money.
Good Shooting,
English Bob
----------
cheers,
Phil
hammer_400
Senior Member
i think one of the probs with sigma, especially the cheaper one is the QC,
so far from my experiance with my sigma lens, i've found it to be sharp at 55mm, sharper than the kit lens at 45mm, but at 200mm it starts to soften up abit, mine does not soften up as much as in the link, but once stopped down to f6/7 it's much better. So far my copy of the lens has not been noticably softer wide open at 200mm, if u look closely at 100% its obviously softer but for normal viewing its not really noticeable. I dun have a 40-150 but my gut feeling is that it will be a tad sharper throughout and it's also a tad bit brighter. I'm guessing that AF would also be faster. But so far i'm satisfied with my sigma's optical performance, compared to the 40-150, its smaller, cheaper and has longer reach.
so far from my experiance with my sigma lens, i've found it to be sharp at 55mm, sharper than the kit lens at 45mm, but at 200mm it starts to soften up abit, mine does not soften up as much as in the link, but once stopped down to f6/7 it's much better. So far my copy of the lens has not been noticably softer wide open at 200mm, if u look closely at 100% its obviously softer but for normal viewing its not really noticeable. I dun have a 40-150 but my gut feeling is that it will be a tad sharper throughout and it's also a tad bit brighter. I'm guessing that AF would also be faster. But so far i'm satisfied with my sigma's optical performance, compared to the 40-150, its smaller, cheaper and has longer reach.
- Status
Similar threads
