Should a Sigma Sigma AF 400mm work with a LA-EA2?

Hobgoblin wrote: neilt3 wrote: OhioTry wrote: Thank you to everyone who posted and to everyone who welcomed me to the forum. Thanks to your advice I have not bid on the 400 mm. I bid unsuccessfully on the 170-500, and am now looking at the Tamron 200-400 mm. I had the Sigma 170-500mm lens years ago and was very disappointed with it . I bought it to use with my Sony a100 and even on 10mp it wasn't very sharp . Maybe modern , higher end cameras with micro focus adjust could make better use of it , I don't know . But I think it's good that you didn't win it . I assume you know of our lens database and review section ? https://www.dyxum.com/dforum/topic24857.html I think you do the 170-500 something of an injustice. It may not be the sharpest lens when compared to some of the more modern alternatives or even the much more expensive telephotos that were its contemporaries but I found it to perform really well under safari conditions. You have to take into account that when used at a long distance the haze effect will increase and pin sharp images are hardly possible. I used it on a Minolta 5D, A100 A57 and A580. Image stabilisation or SuperSteady Shot was in its infancy then and not really comparable to what is included in newer bodies.

Maybe it was my copy that was bad then , but it really was that poor .
Even used on a tripod , rock solid or on a beanbag on a stone wall , pointed at a fairly close bird feeder etc, the images were poor .
This is in the UK , fairly close , average temperature , so no heat or atmospheric haze .

I found that images from my Minolta 100-300mm APO D cropped to a similar field of view gave superior results .
I did side by side comparisons , including with teleconverters and other lenses , the Sigma lost all the time .
Tried it on a few other cameras like the a580 and a900 ( with MFA) before getting rid of it .

I don't miss it !