Cryptopixel wrote:
> http://www.clocksnprints.com/bugsat200mm.htm
Clicked send on my other reply before I was ready. oops.
Anyway, as I said before, nice pic doug.
>
> Sigma and other after market lens makers have some exceptional lenses
> in their ranges. The patented nature of lens based image stabilization
> means that these smaller makers are at a substancial disadvantage...
> Until the likes of Pentax and Sony (to name just two) catch up with
> camera body technology.
>
> The latest Pentax K20D is one example of where serious photographers
> can save thousands of dollars and not sacrifice anything, compared to
> buying Canon and Nikon kits. In-camera image stabilization saves
> photographers serious money when buying excellent quality lenses.
>
> The Sigma 70 -200 F/2.8 (macro) that took this picture costs less than
> half of what a VR Nikon equivalent costs. Almost enough price
> difference to pay for a Pentax K20D body!
Was this shot with a K20D? - I thought you were using S5's
and D300s.
>
> It's hard to justify the weight and cost of in-lens gyros when cameras
> with sensor based IS are now every bit as good as their Canon and
> Nikon rivals.
Most tests tend to show that lens based IS is better than
body based, and that's probably right. But we survived so
long without any IS at all, that surely there are more
im****tant things to rate a system on than the performance of
IS with one or two particular lenses. Canon & Nikon
definitely have a better range of fast telephoto lenses than
Pentax do - this makes In-Body or In-Lens IS irrelevant if
it is hard to even find a suitable lens for the body. But
certainly for someone who mostly needs wide through to
moderate-telephoto the Pentax system represents exceptional
value.
