Cherry pick - I didn't buy online but paid more from a local pro
dealer so that I could be sure I'd get a good one. Check for
sharpness on both sides of the image at 12mm in particular (I
returned the first one as soft on the left). I think many complaints
are from people who have unrealistic expectations (it's off-brand AND
pushing the technological envelope) and those who just can't cope
with the demands of the beast.
I find it good on full frame - don't know about smaller sensors.
Perversely, some lenses perform worse on smaller sensors (see
DPreview's review of the new Nikon 70-200mm on FX and DX).
I didn't expect it to be ultra sharp - and it isn't. My benchmark for
that is my Canon 70-200mm f2.8 non-IS. But nothing that can't be
fixed later.
Conversely, using 12mm at full size is a very difficult thing to do
well. In some ways, tougher than using a fisheye.
Andrew Fildes
afildes@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
On 11/07/2008, at 8:22 PM, Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> Comments on the Sigma? Reviews on B&H say awful or really great.
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|