Sigma 28-105 test


sebas77

Link Posted 18/02/2017 - 19:24
So, I bought this lens, which I am returning because I realised 90 pound were too much for it (and it didn't come with a hood). I decided to take some photos before returning it and, while apparently it has some bad reviews, I really can't say it's a bad lens for the price!

What do you think?

https://flic.kr/s/aHskPnczvk https://flic.kr/s/aHskSgrcnd https://flic.kr/s/aHskPeii49 https://flic.kr/s/aHskPeir35

2.8-4 and NOT the DG version. PP just exposure adjustment.
Last Edited by sebas77 on 18/02/2017 - 19:25

JAK

Link Posted 18/02/2017 - 20:19
sebas77 wrote:
So, I bought this lens, which I am returning because I realised 90 pound were too much for it..... I really can't say it's a bad lens for the price!

I don't follow that logic?
John K

HarisF1

Link Posted 18/02/2017 - 20:45
Lens costs too much, still delivers a decent image.

The image is alright for the price range but the item price to too expensive for his needs/requirements.

...something like that.

JAK

Link Posted 18/02/2017 - 20:55
Yes, could be. But spend less and it maybe full of fungi! We've all paid too much on occasion for something but if it meets our needs it isn't the end of the world.
John K

sebas77

Link Posted 19/02/2017 - 00:08
It's on this forum for 50 pound but beside that do you think it deserves so bad reviews?
Last Edited by sebas77 on 19/02/2017 - 00:08

JAK

Link Posted 19/02/2017 - 00:44
PF reviews suggest its bad, but there are some more positive ones here:
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/28-105mm-f-2-8-4-0-a...
The consensus suggests its a bit soft wide open (nothing unusual about that) but OK stopped down. Its how it suits you that matters! I'd normally make sure it has a lens hood on it outdoors in the sunshine to help contrast.
I've not tried one myself so can only go on what others have said but it seems par for the course for budget lenses designed for film cameras in the 90s. Providing you fill the frame with the subject all should be well, but it might show issues should you need to do moderate cropping of images whereas the new Pentax DFA would win hands down should that be needed.
One aspect to consider is how it focuses, is it reasonably fast , reliable, and accurate? It is isn't it might let you down occasionally.
John K
Last Edited by JAK on 19/02/2017 - 00:56

sebas77

Link Posted 19/02/2017 - 09:45
It's as fast as other screw motors, but yes some times fails to find the focus. I bought the new dfa for a decent price, I am going to try it as well

JAK

Link Posted 20/02/2017 - 16:01
There's a Pentax 28-105 for sale here including lens hood which is usually missing
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/SMC-Pentax-FA-28-105mm-F3-2-4-5-AL-IF-Lens-/2823645528...
John K
Last Edited by JAK on 20/02/2017 - 16:02

sebas77

Link Posted 20/02/2017 - 18:21
Ah! At that price I bought it. Well another compare soon then. Let's see if I have to return the dfa

sebas77

Link Posted 26/02/2017 - 10:01
ok tested! the old pentax 28-105 3.2/4.5 is in par with the sigma 28-105 2.8/4.0. IMO they are both decent lens for the price. However the DFA 28-105, that I am going to keep, is slightly sharper at the center, but totally another story at the corners. The DFA stays sharp along the whole frame, while the cheap lenses are quite blurry at the corners.

Colors and contrast seemed similar to me.
Last Edited by sebas77 on 26/02/2017 - 10:02
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.