You are encyclopaedic in your recall, Piers. You continually astound
me :-)
Paul, I answered this question from someone (my recall is more
flawed ...) a few weeks ago. I used the Sigma 55-200 (efl 110-400)
and it is a fine, light lens. I thought that the focusing was
slowish, but the ZD 50-200 is pretty slow from end-to-end as well. I
used it to photograph a Spitfire at an air display on Friday and the
broken cloud caused problems with focusing.
So, since the Sigma is pretty nicely priced I could recommend it
easily. And the lightness and compactness mean that you are likely
to carry it. The ZD is a bit larger and heavier.
Chris
On 30 Jul 2006, at 20:28, Piers Hemy wrote:
> Chris can answer you directly, Paul, because I am pretty sure he
> initially
> used a Sigma, but now uses the ZD. Make of that what you will...
>
> --
> Piers
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:olympus-owner@xxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf
> Of Paul Braun
> Sent: 30 July 2006 19:57
> To: Olympus List
> Subject: [OM] Sigma digitals on an E1
>
> Because I don't see anything in my saved emails, and I'm too danged
> lazy to
> hunt down archives and search for them....
>
> I would love to have something like the DigiZuiko 50-200, but a
> grand aint'
> in my budget. I could go for a long manual lens, but the more I use
> the
> 14-54, the more I'm liking AF. Especially if I'm shooting a race.
>
> Are the Sigma lenses decent? Are they close enough to the Zuikos
> that I
> won't regret not spending the extra cash on the Olympus glass? I
> also need
> to pick up an FL-50, so I have to budget things here and there.
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|