Calling all Sony Alpha users! (Part 4)

Status
Not open for further replies.
List of DOA Sigma lenses I've personally bought:

1) Sigma 150mm f/2.8 - Brand new, first sample soft and hazy. Replaced with a brand new one in one week by Sigma UK
2) Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 HSM - Brand new - Lens hunted for focus and couldn't lock on any under 4 feet. Focus mech repaired. I bought this "Grey" (unknowingly) and got stung for £90 repair bill!
3) Sigma 70-200 HSM MKI (Jessops) - Stunk. Returned for a refund.
3) Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 HSM - Brand new. unsuable wide open at 70mm. Returned for a refund (4 of those, 2 in Nikon fit)
4) Sigma 12-24 HSM (Nikon fit.. 4 attempts to find one without "de-centering" defects..4 was EXCELLENT!
5) Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM MKII - Stunk,showed crops here.. returned for refund
6) Sigma 100-300 f/4 - Bought brand new, stunk wide open, returned for refund

Never had any problems with:

Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 - f/5.6 (in Sony or Nikon fit),
Sigma 15-30 f/3.5 (Nikon and Sony fit)
Sigma 30mm f/1.4 (tried several of these in Nikon fit and all spot on)
50mm f1/4 HSM (Sony and Nikon fit)
Sigma 70mm f/2.8 (Brillaint lens, Nikon fit)
Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 HSM (Nikon fit)
 
I was satisfied with mine two . but this HSM looks ridiculous. if I had money I think I would've gone for the hsm and if that was what i would've gotten, I would never in my life buy a sigma :LOL:
 
Starastin said:
at least it looks good. I just had to bid on something yesterday ! a total addiction.

I'll wait, maybe somebody has an adapter I could buy from here, if not I guess I'll get one of those adapters that don't allow to focus till infinity but instead get a bit better macro .
Click to expand...

You can get them on Ebay:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Minolta-MD-Lens-for-Sony-AF-Macro-Extension-Tube-/180552562934

TBH given the price of these adaptors I don't think a 50mm MD + Adaptor is good value vs a Minolta 50mm f/1.7 for use on Alpha bodies.

I think the MD is more interesting to 4/3 owners or NEX.
 
Last edited:
CBA100 showed me one used in auction . if i don't get it for 10+ ,
I'll get the one without the glass. they cost around 12 or so.

I got the MD for 13 and it looks like brand new (i hope that in real life as well) , i just couldn't help it.

now I'm hunting zeiss 50mm's and takumars .
 
The Pentax 55mm f/1.8 Super Takamur is REALLY nice, and an M42 adaptor is only £2 or £3 and will shoot to infinity without glass. These are 30 to 40 years old so you need to be sure the glass hasn't "yellowed"

You can get "chipped" M42 adaptors which give focus confirm. They usually report EXIF as 50mm f/1.7 which is close enough for the 55mm f/1.8. They are a bit more expensive.
 
Also don't forget Tamron Adaptall lenses - the 90mm f/2.5 macro is amazing..and the 135mm f/2.5 is very nice. Adaptors are about £20 and you don't need any glass to keep infinity focus.
 
My 11-18mm has been delivered and is waiting for me at home! 2 more hours of work! Can't wait to give it a try. I'm going to London at the weekend with a friend so will be a good chance to test it out with some architecture type shots. Think I might just take the 11-18 and my prime to save a bit of weight.
 
Just to confirm my earlier post with the latest copy of the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8.

I got home from work - awful light and its dark, but actually it makes the test target look interesting :)



These are the lenses:


DSC00541.jpg

​

The KM 28-75 f/2.8 is an identical lens to the Tamron 28-75, and I use this sometimes for hikes if I don't fancy carrying the Zeiss.

This is the full target (28-75 f/2.8) - focus is on "KIA" about 15 feet away.


DSC00532.jpg

​

Here is the 28-75 vs the Sigma:


28752470.jpg


The KM is pretty good wide open, just hint of CA.

This is the Zeiss vs the Sigma:

24702470.jpg


Both the KM (Tamron 28-75) and Zeiss smoke the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 HSM :bonk:

The Zeiss and KM 28-75 are close (which is why I keep the KM 28-75), the Ziess is a tad sharper with better contrast and CA control. In reality, the KM 28-75 f/2.8 is sharp enough for critical applications wide open - this is why this version (in the Tamron 28-75 guise) is one my favourite zoom lens in Sony or Nikon fit.

I'm definately not trying a 5th Sigma as they seem to be all like this :nuts:
 
Last edited:
Sony 11-18mm arrived, as described, absolutely spotless and boxed too! Haven't had much of a play yet as the weather is pretty awful but I can safely say I love the wideness. Probably will end up being a bit of a gimmick lens, but who knows! Don't know till you try :D
 
George7 said:
Sony 11-18mm arrived, as described, absolutely spotless and boxed too! Haven't had much of a play yet as the weather is pretty awful but I can safely say I love the wideness. Probably will end up being a bit of a gimmick lens, but who knows! Don't know till you try :D
Click to expand...

glad you're pleased with it george..will leave trader feedback (y)
 
These cheap Sigma f2.8 zooms ought to be remarketed as soft focus lenses, maybe they would have a lower rate of returns if expectations were lower...
 
Last edited:
Andy starts his mornings by dissing Sigma zoom's :LOL:
is that the same HSM edition in the link, looks utterly rubbish :(
maybe you forgot to take that soft filter off ! :D

btw, my MD 1.7 just arrived. have to decide now which one of the 3 types of adapters to get :)

tryed it holding it by hand and shooting at 1.7 - looks like a keeper. sharp enough.
 
Last edited:
Starastin said:
Andy starts his mornings by dissing Sigma zoom's :LOL:
Click to expand...

Did I show you the Sigma 100-300 f/4 I got a refund on last week :puke:

100-300.jpg


Or the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 HSM II vs a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8

sigma-tamron100crop.jpg


I know it sounds like I'm dissing Sigma - but the crops speak for themselves... :|
 
I think I missed the 100-300mm f4 shot, but I see it now. I saw one for around 400+ and thought it was a super bargain. looks like you'd be better off with a beercan :)
 
Starastin said:
I think I missed the 100-300mm f4 shot, but I see it now. I saw one for around 400+ and thought it was a super bargain. looks like you'd be better off with a beercan :)
Click to expand...

Yes, its the one that is being sold for around £450-£480. I actually bought this on behalf of a friend... he took it out and went... "err Andy.. have you seen this..." and showed me loads of OOF ducks and swans. I tested it my end to rule out user error, and we got a refund on it 48 hours later :LOL:
 
puddleduck said:
Yes, its the one that is being sold for around £450-£480. I actually bought this on behalf of a friend... he took it out and went... "err Andy.. have you seen this..." and showed me loads of OOF ducks and swans. I tested it my end to rule out user error, and we got a refund on it 48 hours later :LOL:
Click to expand...

lol , you can get new one from ebay seller for around 490 delivered.
 
didn't win the auction for sigma 28mm f1.8 , the old one. but it's probably for the best. and it's good NOT to spend money ! :LOL:
 
puddleduck said:
I just took deliverey of a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 HSM. This is now the 4th I've had (two in Nikon and two in Sony) and all 4 have totally sucked.

This is the so-called "IQ" (I use the word image quality in italics)

http://www.andydrakeimages.co.uk/Sig2470/DSC00516.JPG
Click to expand...


Anyone remember the AP review that rated the Sigma 24-70 HSM as optically on a par with the CZ 24-70?

I'm not doubting the integrity of AP but how did they reach that conclusion?

I had a Sigma 24-70 and it was horrible, really horrible. On the other hand I've told my wife that I want to be buried with my CZ 24-70! :)
 
Starastin said:
1000post !!! (what a spammer !! :LOL: )

is the mini beercan any good ? is it better than the 18-55mm kit lens ?

thanks,
D.
Click to expand...

ive got a bit lost at how many beercans there are but if your on about the 35-70mm f4 then yeah its ace, i absolutely adore mine, i wouldnt say its better than the kit lens and i find its definately not as useful but if you want colourful photos and great bokeh then its defo worth considering for the price you can pick one up for. A bit annoying that its only got a 49mm thread though but instead of getting a slot filter or more screw ins i just got a 49mm to 55mm step up ring. I find the kit lens more useful though because its wider but (thanks to george) im after the sony 16-105mm anyway but cant afford it right now. Once i can im selling both lenses and whipping one up straight away :)

Si
 
is the mini beercan micro adjusted a.k.a - sharp, with spot on focus ?
How much would you be looking for ? °

thanks,
D
 
tbh mate i only started on photography about 5 months ago so i dont really know what that means :D I find it quite sharp but aside from the kit lens i havent got anything to compare it to so i wouldnt really know i just got my reviews for it from dyxum. It can get annoying because the zoom ring is quite stiff and it isnt AF in macro but i prefer manual in macro anyway.

Dont really know how much id be after tbh, dont really know how much they go for. £40 i think?? Thinking of banging it on ebay in the next week or so to fund the purchase of a 10 stop ND :)

Si
 
Last edited:
Deasy said:
Anyone remember the AP review that rated the Sigma 24-70 HSM as optically on a par with the CZ 24-70?

I'm not doubting the integrity of AP but how did they reach that conclusion?

I had a Sigma 24-70 and it was horrible, really horrible. On the other hand I've told my wife that I want to be buried with my CZ 24-70! :)
Click to expand...

Well most reviewers never want to offend the companies too much..

Now for example a review site might have a scale from 0 to 20, but nothing ever gets less than a 15/20. So the usable review scale is 15/20 to 20/20.

15/20 = 0%
16/20 = 20%
17/20 = 40%
18/20 = 60%
19/20 = 80%
20/20 = 100&

So your if you give the Zeiss 19/20, but the Sigma 18/20 you are really saying "the Sigma is only 80% as good as the Ziess" but you can do it without making it looking too bad in your scoring.. because nothing gets less than a 15/20 in your reviews.
 
don't shoot me !
I just want to post this wonderful list of lenses ! :)


AF zoom lenses
Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 16–35 mm f/2.8 ZA(SONY SSM motor)
AF 17–35 mm f/2.8-4 (D)
AF 17–35 mm f/3.5 G
AF 20–35 mm f/3.5-4.5
AF 24–50 mm f/4 (Original, RS)
AF 24–70 mm f/2.8
Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* 24–70 mm f/2.8 ZA(SONY SSM motor)
AF 24–85 mm f/3.5-4.5 (RS, II)
AF 24–105 mm f/3.5-4.5 (D, Minolta)
AF 24–105 mm f/3.5-4.5 (D, Sony)
AF 28–70 mm f/2.8 G
AF 28–75 mm f/2.8 (D)
AF 28–75 mm f/2.8 (D SONY ASM motor)
AF 28–80 mm f/3.5-5.6 (RS, D)
AF 28–80 mm f/4-5.6 (xi, RS)
AF 28–85 mm f/3.5-4.5 (Original, RS)
AF 28–100 mm f/3.5-5.6 (D)
AF 28–105 mm f/3.5-4.5 (RS, II)
AF 28–105 mm f/3.5-4.5 xi
AF 28–135 mm f/4-4.5
AF 35–70 mm f/3.5-4.5 (Original, II)
AF 35–70 mm f/4 (Original, RS, II)
AF 35–80 mm f/4-5.6 (RS, xi, II)
AF 35–105 mm f/3.5-4.5 (Original, RS)
AF 35–200 mm f/4.5-5.6 xi
AF 80–200 mm f/2.8 Apo G (Original, HS)
AF 80–200 mm f/4.5-5.6 xi
AF 70–200 mm f/2.8 APO SSM (G, Sony G)
AF 70–210 mm f/3.5-4.5
AF 70-210mm f/4 (nick name: beercan)
AF 70–210 mm f/4.5-5.6 (RS, II)
AF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 SSM (Sony G lens SSM motor)
AF 70-400mm f/4-5.6 (Sony G)
AF 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 (Original, RS, D, Sony)
AF 100–200 mm f/4.5
AF 100–300 mm f/4.5-5.6 (RS, APO, APO D)
AF 100–400 mm f/4.5-6.7 APO
DT Zoom Lenses
AF DT 11–18 mm f/4.5-5.6 (D, Sony)
AF DT 16–105 mm f/3.5-5.6 (D, Sony)
AF DT 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 (Sony SAM)
AF DT 18-70mm f/3.5-5.6 (D, Sony)
AF DT 18–200 mm f/3.5-6.3 (D, Sony)
AF DT 18–250 mm f/3.5-6.3 (Sony)
AF DT 55–200 mm f/4-5.6 (D, Sony, Sony SAM)
Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar T* DT 16-80 f/3.5-4.5 ZA
[edit]Prime lenses
Standard Primes
AF 50mm f/1.4 (Original, RS, Sony)
AF 50mm f/1.7 (Original, RS)
AF DT 50mm f/1.8 (Sony SAM)
Wide-angle Primes
AF 16mm f/2.8 Fisheye (Original, Sony)
AF 20 mm f/2.8 (Original, RS, Sony)
AF 24mm f/2.8 (Original, RS)
AF 28 mm f/2 (Original, RS)
AF 28 mm f/2.8 (Original, Sony)
AF 35 mm f/2.0 (Original, RS)
AF 35 mm f/1.4 (Original, G, Sony)
Telephoto Primes
AF 85 mm f/1.4 (Original, G, G D, G D Limited)
Carl Zeiss Planar T* 85mm f/1.4 ZA
AF 100 mm f/2.0
AF 100 mm f/2.8 Soft Focus (SF)
Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* 135mm f/1.8 ZA
AF 135 mm f/2.8
STF 135mm f/2.8 [T4.5]* (RS, Sony)
AF 200 mm f/2.8 APO G (Original, HS)
AF 300 mm f/2.8 APO G (Original, HS)
AF 300mm f/2.8 APO SSM G (Original, Sony)
AF 300 mm f/4 APO G HS
AF 400 mm f/4.5 APO G HS
AF 500mm Reflex (RS, Sony)
AF 600 mm f/4 APO G (Original, HS)
Macro Primes
AF DT 30mm f/2.8 Macro (Sony SAM)
AF 50mm f/2.8 Macro (Original, RS, D, Sony)
AF 50 mm f/3.5 Macro
AF 100mm f/2.8 Macro (Original, RS, D, Sony)
AF 200 mm f/4 Macro Apo G
AF Macro Zoom 1x-3x f/1.7-2.8
 
Last edited:
mastertrinity said:
hey starastin i know its not officially out yet but could you include the new 24mm f2, 35mm f1.8 and 85mm f2.8?
Click to expand...

nah ! not going to. I'm angry that they are still preorder :LOL:
It's not my list I copied it. I excluded the teleconverters.

civicboy40 said:
i know the canoon and nikon fanboy will drone one that we dont have as many choices as they do........but that list looks like enough pocket me for me thank you!
Click to expand...


but unfortunately, the not so popular lenses are very expensive used. for example - 35mm f2 , I could find only one example at it was well over 400 quid.
there are some rare and good at keh.com but it's only worth if you buy expensive ones because of the shipping fees.

there's that tamron super beast 28-105mm f2.8 with filter thread 82mm for 299dollars + tax + shipping.
 
Starastin said:
there's that tamron super beast 28-105mm f2.8 with filter thread 82mm for 299dollars + tax + shipping.
Click to expand...

Its crap unfortunately! I got one from Warehouse Express (new old stock) and it was dire. Awfully soft wide open.

If you google this lens, everyone says the 28-75 f/2.8 is much better, so I don't think its a good choice.

Yes, the 35/2 is too expensive.. the Nikon fit version is awesome.. readily available and under £200 so I'd never buy one one in Sony fit.

The 35mm f/1.4 I did try to order, but my order was cancelled!
 
I've read that it's rubbish and big, but still would like to try out a good copy. at least it's bright because of the 2.8 and the range is great, although I bet it's heavy as hell. Don't like heavy lenses unless they're zeiss or stuff like 70-400mm .

I was shocked at the 35/2 price and rarity.
35mm f1.4 - not a lot of raves about it as well. it was suggested to get the zeiss 24-70mm instead as he said that it's sharper at 2.8 .

so - not actually a lot of lenses you can use in the sony range ! :LOL:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top