HSM wont be built into any Pentax mount lenses, because the mount does not support it.
I tested both the 70-200 f2.8 and the 100-300 f4.0 a year and a half ago. Both were pretty similar in terms of performance and the size difference was surprisingly not much at all. Both VERY good performers. I had a hard time deciding, but eventually put the longer reach ahead of the wider aperture in my crieria. I found that most of my shots for this type of lenswere over 200mm and sometimes even 300 was only just enough. If I were making the choice today, based on *istD usage, I would go the other way because the 70-200 becomes an effective 300 which would have been enough and the f2.8 would have been nice. I would still go for the longer reach personally for full frame work. > -----Original Message----- > From: Ramesh Kumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 17 December 2003 23:29 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Sigma Zoom Telephoto 70-200mm f/2.8 EX APO IF > > > I forgot to say HSM. > > Did you use HSM version or non-HSM version? > > I read reviews at photo.net. Few people said that HSM > facility will be used incase of Minolta body. > > Is HSM going to work on MZ-5n & *istD(for future)? > > Thanks for detailed review. > Ramesh > > > > --- Cotty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 17/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > disgorged: > > > > >I am thinking of buying Sigma Zoom Telephoto > > 70-200mm > > >f/2.8 EX APO IF. > > > > > >I have read this lens is better than Tokina & > > Tamron. > > >I would like to hear from the users of this lens. > > > > > > > > >Buying Pentax is ruled out because of the hefty > > price. > > > > I used to have this lens in PKAF and now in EOS. I > > find it a fairly well- > > built lens with a very useful max aperture of f/2.8. > > The size and weight > > are not objectionable (at this focal range and > > aperture, these lenses are > > not flyweights!) and hand-holding is comfortable. > > > > The tripod collar is completely removable, but I > > find it better to keep > > it on, even when hand-holding. A tightening nut on > > the collar allows lens > > rotation while on a tripod. > > > > Optically it is not bad, read the tests for the lens > elsewhere online. > > I have found it a good performer even wide open. Let's > > face it - why buy a > > fast zoom if you're never going to use it wide open? > > It's a good sport > > lens in low light. Stops down to f/32. Front element > > does not rotate, and > > lens stays the same shape and length at any > > focus/focal length. > > > > The zoom ring grip is okay. Personally I prefer the > > PK or Canon or Tokina > > rubber grips, but it's fine on the Sigma. Nice wide > > area to turn, even > > with gloves on. The focus ring is even bigger and > > the manual focus > > overrides the AF, so it's easy to let AF get you in > > the ballpark, then > > tweak in manual if desired. Very good system for > > this. > > > > The hood is a so-called 'perfect hood', shaped like > > a petal, is a bayonet > > fit and you'll look a real pro with that lot > > drooping off the end of your > > MZ-50 ;-) The hood is reversible so you can carry it > > on the lens the > > wrong way around if you like. > > > > Comes with a nice quality fabric lens case. > > > > All in all, for the money it's a good piece of glass > > and used with the > > matched 1.4X and 2X converters gives much > > flexibility with telephoto > > coverage in your kit. > > > > On a less-than-full-frame DSLR, gives a very useful > 'effective' 300mm > > plus at f/2.8 and that's a real bonus. > > > > On a 35mm film camera, is a good lens to have for > > anything from > > portraiture to landscape to wildlife and beyond. > > > > Of course I would rather have a 70-200 2.8 USM IS, > > or the Pentax if I > > still used Pentax, but until I devote more than a > > grand to that cause, > > the Sigma is a pretty good buy. > > > > Best, > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, > > Cotty > > > > > > ___/\__ > > || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche > > ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps > > _____________________________ > > Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard > http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree > >
