Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: Sigma 55-200mm vs Zuiko 50-200mm

Subject: [OM] Re: Sigma 55-200mm vs Zuiko 50-200mm
From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 06:43:10 -0400
In my business of shooting wedding receptions, bar mitzvahs and other 
events in darkened ballrooms, etc. the brighter image in the finder and 
on the autofocus sensor from that 2.8 constant aperture ZD lens would be 
a requirement.  However, I'd never consider doing an all day tour of 
bright, sunny Disney World with a greater than 1 kilo boat anchor 
strapped around my neck.  So I need both.

As a lens to carry with you all the time you should have something 
lighter and more compact.  Whether the Sigma is the right choice I don't 
know but I suspect that the ZD will be the wrong choice but for reasons 
unrelated to its optical and mechanical performance virtues.

One thing to note on the Sigma is that it is not a constant aperture 
lens like the ZD.  The ZD has a maximum aperture of f/2.8 regardless of 
the focal length setting.  The Sigma starts out at f/4 at the 55mm end 
but closes down further to f/5.6 at the 200mm end.  The maximum aperture 
at intermediate focal lengths is somewhere between f/4 and f/5.6.

Variable aperture zooms are quite common since they're much less 
expensive to design and manufacture than constant aperture zooms.  Once 
again, in my business I would find this undesirable.  I typically shoot 
in manual mode and this would mean that I couldn't use an aperture of 
less than f/5.6.  If I chose f/4 as the shooting aperture and then 
zoomed out to 200mm the aperture would change on me unexpectedly to 
f/5.6 and my photo would be one stop underexposed.  Most people, 
however, will be shooting in some automatic mode and likely not even be 
aware that the lens has changed aperture on them.  And even for me, I 
don't typically shoot at apertures less than f/8 when covering events. 
But a variable aperture lens could be a problem (for me) at times.

Finally, you should be aware that the typical f/5.6 to f/6.3 max 
aperture at the long end of many telephoto zooms is getting to the point 
where autofocus mechanisms start to have trouble focusing as the light 
fades.  No trouble at all at 10:00 am in Disney World.  At dusk I don't 
know.  Someone who has an E thing with a slower lens like this will have 
to answer.

Hope that helps explain it.  I don't think the ZD 50-200 2.8 is the 
right lens for you unless you can easily afford it plus another.  As to 
which is the right one I'll let others suggest.

Chuck Norcutt


Tim Randles wrote:
> I'm gunning to add 2 more lenses to my arsenal.. so I am comparing
> the following..
> 
> E*AY Item number:          140022555807 Sigma AF 55-200mm F4-5.6
> 
> compared to
> 
> http://www.olympusamerica.com/e1/sys_lens_50mm28.asp
> 
> about the only difference I sort of understand is the F:4 on the
> sigma and the F:2.8 on the Zuiko.. and I still dont really understand
> that, except it has to do with the amount of light it will let in.
> 
> Is there any other differences ( aside from price) that I should
> consider here.. {I gotta tell you though, I had the Zuiko on my e-500
> yesterday at the shop and I got a rush of raw testosterone holding it
> in my hand..(LOL)}
> 
> Cheers.. Tim


==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz