There are good and bad Sigma lenses. I had a Sigma 28-200 once, and it was terrible, so don't get your hopes up. I gave mine away for nothing, and even then, I was overcharging.

It's also the wrong range for digital. A digital GP zoom would be 18-135mm.

The 18-55 is fine though, if you don't shoot wide open.

There are, unfortunately, no good, cheap, bird lenses. The Pentax 80-320 zoom is a possible budget choice, but it's a bit soft at the long end, which is not what you want. I am a fan of my SMCP-F 300mm 1:4.5 (for hand-holding), but it's not a cheap lens, and nor is it easy to find.

There have been some nice, sharp pictures posted here in the last year taken with Sigma lenses, and no doubt somebody will recommend one. Remember that extreme lengths bring their own problems. 400mm is as long as most people are capable of going.

G

I must be slowing down. Chris beat me to it.

G

The rather effusive Ebay description describes the Sigma as being "full auto focus", (which, of course, is meaningless gibberish), and it is also apparently "unbelievably good". As opposed to the kit lens, which is merely "fantastic".

We just have to hope that the reality lives up to the hyperbole.

G

I'm glad the Sigma lens has "full auto focus". I hate those half auto focus lenses.

G

I think this picture is better technically than it is aesthetically.

As you say, the light was right, and you have produced a gorgeous "print" with deep blacks, bright whites, and lots of detail in between. It's the sort of picture that film fans used to say couldn't be done with a digital camera.

But aesthetically, it doesn't quite cut it. The various rather complicated structures don't really add very much, and neither does the lad sweeping up. It's not a compelling composition. IMHO.

Which is a pity, because technically it's one to be proud of.

G

If Pentax bring out a camera with a 24x36 sensor, they'll also need a new range of lenses, as the DAs won't work.

Personally, I think it is more likely that they will resuscitate the 645 than that they will go 24x36. The difference between 35mm and APS just isn't worth the hassle.

G

Good try, Dan, but I suspect the lens will increase in value once it's discontinued. Currently they are only famous; soon they will be legendary.

I'm certainly not selling mine.

G

Their bite is innocuous to humans, but look out for their palps.

G

Now where have I heard that before?

I do have the AF080C (see my sig!), and it's excellent. The guide number (8!) seems low on paper, but I haven't needed more power. It's "adequate", as Rolls Royce used to say in the days when they didn't publish the horse-power of their engines.

G

You're buying lenses so fast, Clarky, that your sig needs continual updating.

But what applies to the FA 100mm will also apply to your Tamron, if you ever use it again. It will be interesting to learn which of the two you prefer (Tamron 90 or Pentax D-FA 100mm).

G