Help on lens
Posted 18/06/2007 - 17:52
Link
I've got the 10-20mm and am very happy with it - I don't use it a huge amount, but it's there when I need it. I couldn't justify the expense of the 12-24 Pentax for the amount I'd use it.
There's a discussion about it here: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4388, along with links to other discussions and pics.
I also have the 105mm EX macro and am highly delighted with that.
One thing about the EX range is that they are very well made, beautifully sturdy, with none of the 'wobble' that the DA zooms tend to have. I don't think sticky-tape is used anywhere. I can't vouch for the non-EX Sigmas though.
Dan
There's a discussion about it here: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4388, along with links to other discussions and pics.
I also have the 105mm EX macro and am highly delighted with that.
One thing about the EX range is that they are very well made, beautifully sturdy, with none of the 'wobble' that the DA zooms tend to have. I don't think sticky-tape is used anywhere. I can't vouch for the non-EX Sigmas though.
Dan
Posted 18/06/2007 - 18:27
Link
Quote:
I've got the 10-20mm and am very happy with it - I don't use it a huge amount, but it's there when I need it. I couldn't justify the expense of the 12-24 Pentax for the amount I'd use it.
There's a discussion about it here: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4388, along with links to other discussions and pics.
I also have the 105mm EX macro and am highly delighted with that.
One thing about the EX range is that they are very well made, beautifully sturdy, with none of the 'wobble' that the DA zooms tend to have. I don't think sticky-tape is used anywhere. I can't vouch for the non-EX Sigmas though.
Dan
Wobble seems to be a feature of one particular FA zoom, the 24-90. However, this is a superb performer, so it doesn't appear to make any difference.I've got the 10-20mm and am very happy with it - I don't use it a huge amount, but it's there when I need it. I couldn't justify the expense of the 12-24 Pentax for the amount I'd use it.
There's a discussion about it here: https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4388, along with links to other discussions and pics.
I also have the 105mm EX macro and am highly delighted with that.
One thing about the EX range is that they are very well made, beautifully sturdy, with none of the 'wobble' that the DA zooms tend to have. I don't think sticky-tape is used anywhere. I can't vouch for the non-EX Sigmas though.
Dan
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 18/06/2007 - 20:13
Link
If I extend my 16-45 and 50-200 zooms, there's definite, although slight, wobble of the extended barrel, perhaps perfectly within tolerance and certainly not a problem. I'm not talking about 5 degrees both ways or anything, but movement none-the-less.
My EX lenses don't do this - although I have to say the 10-20 extends to such a short extent that it's not surprising, but it's rock solid.
Perhaps I've just got wobbly ones!
Dan
My EX lenses don't do this - although I have to say the 10-20 extends to such a short extent that it's not surprising, but it's rock solid.
Perhaps I've just got wobbly ones!
Dan
Posted 18/06/2007 - 22:44
Link
Quote:
If this were to be correct then there could be no objective and logical observation about anything. In fact, it may be partly true because even the best scientists can experiment and find what they want to find, regardless of the facts.
But lets go back a step. Why do I recommend Pentax? Because I have used almost every make of camera in existence, from early 1900s folders through all the TLRs, rangefinders and SLRs and then on to DSLRs and my conclusion has been that the one that gave me the best results and best ergonomics was Pentax. So now I use Pentax and recommend it to others.
I don't think this is prejudice, I don't care what the name is on the front of my camera, but I have examined the field and reached a conclusion.
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.Quote:
but I do not think one person can ever give an objective opinion as it is always based on the prejudices of personal experience.
That's a very interesting observation, but by its own definition cannot be an objective assessment as you have based it on the "prejudices of personal experience"but I do not think one person can ever give an objective opinion as it is always based on the prejudices of personal experience.
If this were to be correct then there could be no objective and logical observation about anything. In fact, it may be partly true because even the best scientists can experiment and find what they want to find, regardless of the facts.
But lets go back a step. Why do I recommend Pentax? Because I have used almost every make of camera in existence, from early 1900s folders through all the TLRs, rangefinders and SLRs and then on to DSLRs and my conclusion has been that the one that gave me the best results and best ergonomics was Pentax. So now I use Pentax and recommend it to others.
I don't think this is prejudice, I don't care what the name is on the front of my camera, but I have examined the field and reached a conclusion.
You seem to be failing to take into account that I am a pentax user and have been for several years. I own one film and 2 digital Pentax SLR's and several thousand pounds worth of Pentax glass and I did not buy them because everyone I know owns one, because clearly in this canikon dominated era that is not the case. But all you seem to want to do is drum me out of town for suggesting that this forum is not objective and that actually sigma lenses are good as well and perhaps better in some cases or for some budgets. I never said it was wrong to suggest Pentax.
So lets recap...
George pointed out that in his experience the build quality was poor because the lens was stuck together with tape (fair enough, but this was over 10 years ago and their QC has changed a lot since then) and you are saying that for you only pentax will do.
Presumably then you disagree with something other than the facts of my original comment:
Quote:
Someone will be along in a moment to tell you their quality control is poor closely followed by someone else telling you only pentax will do.
Someone will be along in a moment to tell you their quality control is poor closely followed by someone else telling you only pentax will do.
Posted 18/06/2007 - 23:09
Link
Quote:
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
No personal attack, just an exploration of irony.
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
Best regards, John
Posted 18/06/2007 - 23:29
Link
calm down Javam, I don't think anyone was intentionally getting at you.
As George pointed out, there are rather a lot of very happy Sigma users on this forum.
You make an interesting point about people not being objective, but surely that's the reason we join forums? To compare and contrast our viewpoint with that of others in the hope of more closely approximating objectivity.
I know that's why I'm here anyway, of course everyone is different.
As George pointed out, there are rather a lot of very happy Sigma users on this forum.
You make an interesting point about people not being objective, but surely that's the reason we join forums? To compare and contrast our viewpoint with that of others in the hope of more closely approximating objectivity.
I know that's why I'm here anyway, of course everyone is different.
you don't have to be mad to post here
but it does help
but it does help
Posted 18/06/2007 - 23:55
Link
Quote:
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
Oh dear. Another disciple of Tony Blair and Joseph Goebbels.John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 19/06/2007 - 11:04
Link
Quote:
G
Well that is not irony, that is downright offensive! Cut yourself often with that tongue George.javam wrote:
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
Oh dear. Another disciple of Tony Blair and Joseph Goebbels.John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
G
Fine I will clear off and leave you to your ivory tower philosophies.
Posted 19/06/2007 - 11:25
Link
Quote:
Fine I will clear off and leave you to your ivory tower philosophies.
Translation: Now that I've got what I wanted, I'm off to start another fight somewhere else.George Lazarette wrote:
G
Well that is not irony, that is downright offensive! Cut yourself often with that tongue George.Quote:
John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
Oh dear. Another disciple of Tony Blair and Joseph Goebbels.John, if you want to disagree with me fine, but don't try and score points off me by ripping my words to shreds as that makes it a much more personal attack.
G
Fine I will clear off and leave you to your ivory tower philosophies.
G
Keywords: Charming, polite, and generally agreeable.
Posted 19/06/2007 - 14:41
Link
Quote:
Hi
Have recently got into digital with a K10D + kit lens after many years with film.
Need some advice on choice of new lens.
Considering
Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC Super Wide Angle Zoom
The 10-20 is the only one of the mentioned lenses that I own. I've had mine from soon after I went digital and it's by far my most used lens. I've been very happy with it both from an optical and a build quality point of view.Hi
Have recently got into digital with a K10D + kit lens after many years with film.
Need some advice on choice of new lens.
Considering
Sigma AF 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC Super Wide Angle Zoom
I'm sure I'd have been just as happy with the Pentax 12-24 (I do tend to favour Pentax lenses although there are 3rd party lenses I also use a lot e.g. the Tokina ATX-Pro F2.8 zooms) however the Sigma was much cheaper and therefore, IMHO, better value.
Regards
Steve
Posted 19/06/2007 - 17:10
Link
Hi
My thanks to all who responded I have stuck in orders for both Sigma lenses so now all I have to do is wait patiently.
Regards Sean
My thanks to all who responded I have stuck in orders for both Sigma lenses so now all I have to do is wait patiently.
Regards Sean
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
8192 posts
22 years
London
George, I have no desire to get into an argument over this as although I do not post much on here, I have read enough to have respect for you and your knowledge, but I do not think one person can ever give an objective opinion as it is always based on the prejudices of personal experience.
My comment is based on seeing that a question about the 10-20 on epz gets around a 90% 'good lens' response where as on here 90% will tend to say buy the 12-24 because...
I am sure the 12-24 is a good lens, but taking a snapshot of a broader user base, the consensus would appear to be that the Sigma is better value than most if not all other offerings in that focal range, irrespective of the manufacturers it is compared to.
If we are just going to go on personal experience then I have 3 sigma ex lenses and 2 non ex and all have been fine and I therefore have no issue with recommending them.
I would be interested to know when your bad experience with a Sigma lens occurred and if it was an EX or more consumer orientated item.
But my view, as somebody who reads every post to this forum, is that a lot of people here use Sigma lenses very happily, and that such people probably outnumber the opposite camp by a considerable margin.
G