The Sigma is probably no better or worse than the zoom you have.
I think the great values out there are the Tamron SP 35-210/3.5-4.2 and
Tokina AT-X 35-200/3.5-4.5. The Tokina is a bit smaller and lighter and
theTamron is more easily found. The SP and AT-X are the top lines for
these manufacturers, use ED glass and better construction techniques and
are a definite cut above the vast sea of consumer price/moderate quality
35-70,80,105,135 and 70,80-200,210 zooms out there. Better yet, although
premium priced when they were new, they are now available at very
reasonable prices. There are a couple of the Tamrons on eBay now, but
they are over priced (assuming the reserve is 80-900f the BIN). You
should be able to find a good one for under $100. Remember the Tamron
needs the Adaptall 2 mount for Olympus (and needs a particular version
for the OM-4), which may come with it or need to be bought separately.
Both lenses also do 'macro' to 1:4.
These are about as close to quality 'do-everything' lenses as can be
found for reasonable prices and cover a much broader range of focal
lengths. I took my Tokina and a couple of WAs on a 2 week trip to Maine
last year and was very pleased with using it and with the results. If
your taste runs to longer lenses, you might also consider the Tamron SP
60-300/3.8-5.4, bigger and heavier, but a lot more reach and amazing
macro to 1:1.55. Also a bit more money at around $130, but a great lens
and terrific value.
Moose
Andrea wrote:
Saw this lens on eBay
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=1346535905 and I was
wondering if this would be a better lens than my Cosina made Zuiko 70-210/4.5 to
5.6 ? I know Sigma makes some good optics, and this lens seems to be multi-coated.
What do folks think? Or should I save my pennies for a REAL Zuiko zoom, perhaps a
35-105 and
then a 200/4?
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|