From: "Patrick Genovese"
The sigma is said to be softer wide open at the long end. What I am
trying to figure out is.
How much softer is it... Ie is it unusable at f/2.8 at 200mm or will a
little bit of unsharp mask in Post processing fix the problem.
On the other hand the Tamron is said to be razor sharp but tends to
dip a bit in quality around 135mm.
I'm willing to accept slightly softer results at f/2.8 from the Sigma
if they can be fixed in post processing but not if it is useless at
f/2.8 since opting for the sigma will give me fast/quiet AF and quick
shift focusing.. For me this is important because I do quite a lot of
theatre work. The tamron is known to be noisier and probably slower on
the AF front since it relies on screw drive AF.
The perfect solution would be a combo of the Tammy's supposedly
superior optics in the sigma body level body.
I don't have either of the two lenses you're considering, but I do have
both Sigma and Tamron lenses (one of each).
Sigma's build quality appears better to me, although that's comparing a
"Pro" Sigma lens to a rather disappointing Tamron consumer zoom.
I do have the Tokina AF ATX Pro 80-200 f/2.8 which I consider an
excellent choice in that range. It's really solid, very sharp wide open
at the long end, although the focusing is somewhat slower than newer
lenses with hypersonic motors.
Unfortunately, Tokina appears to have stopped making lenses in Pentax mount.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
