Sigma 75-200mm F2.8-3.5 A-mount lens review by JeremyT
|JeremyT#6266 date: Oct-24-2009|
flare control: 3
|ownership:||I own this lens|
|compared to:||SAL 55-200mm F4-5.6|
SAL 75-300mm F4.5-5.6
Tokina 80-200mm f/2.8
|price paid:||80 USD|
- Zoom creep
- May need to rechip
- CA when wide open
- "Bokeh" can be a little "harsh"
|comment:||Mine is labeled "Access Tempo," and it was NOT compatible with modern bodies. Therefore, I purchased a chip from James Lao. My 'price paid' includes the chip.|
This lens is a gem. It's faster than the beercan and it's quite sharp wide open on my A200. Stopping down to f/4 shows improvement but I seldom feel like it's necessary. This is my poor man's 'sports zoom.'
I shot a little bit with bright light and I saw some flare. I don't have a hood, and any hood would need to screw into the filter ring (yuck).
Stopped down to the same apertures it seems to be sharper than the SAL 55-200mm, but the more modern 55-200mm kills it with respect to flare and CA.
Mechanically this thing feels like a piece of crap. It weighs way more than modern consumer zooms, and when fully extended there's more play than I'd like. It's a push/pull zoom mechanism and my copy shimmies and shakes when it autofocuses.
What the heck though, it's cheaper than dirt and it takes great pictures. If you can find one that you know works for cheap, GET IT, you won't be sorry. If you have one that needs to be rechipped, don't pay as much, and plan on spending 65 USD (and some time) to get it working. It's worth it!
* UPDATE March 2010:
This lens continues to impress me on the A700, where focusing speed is improved. I tend to leave the chip set to a focal length in the middle and SSS seems to work just fine throughout its range. I much prefer this to the beercan and it greatly reduces my temptation to buy an expensive f/2.8 zoom.