Alternative to Sigma 28-105mm lens

[joeyk49]

As some may have seen on another thread; my Sigma Aspherical IF 28-105mm lens vignettes pretty badly when backed all the way out to 28mm. This is a really annoying development (no pun intended, well maybe...) and leaves me with just a 50mm lens to use with my Minolta 450si.

Does anyone have a suggestion for an alternative lens. I like the versatility of the zoom; my wallet won't let me buy, what would amount to, probably, three different prime lenses. So, what's a cheapskate like me to do?

 

[Ole]

Three top notch primes will most likely be a lot cheaper than a decent zoom with that range!

Or you could buy a longer zoom and a prime 28mm?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The Tamron SP 35-105/2.8 ASPH is a nice lens--really sharp but a little barrel/pincushion distortion at the ends of the range like all these tele-wide zooms. It's been "superceded" by the 28-105, so you can often find it for $250-400, which is a pretty good deal. I wouldn't replace it with a 28-105, because I think one invites more optical problems by widening the zoom range. Constant f:2.8 aperture as well. Here's a sample shot (where the pincushion distortion is particularly visible)--

I use it mostly for candid portraits at events like graduations and such, where there aren't likely to be straight lines near the edge of the frame.

 

[Nick Zentena]

Are you sure the problem is the lens? Could it be a hood? Or were you using a filter? IIRC you mentioned a donut. It vignette all around the image? With 35mm I'd expect the corners to get cut off long before you got to a donut.

 

[Dave Parker]

I have both the Minolta 35-105 and the xi 28-105 Minolta and they are both top notch performers, the 35-105 I like a bit better as it is a manual zoom and the 28-105 is a minolta xi series zoom, which many say they don't like, but the optical quality of both of them are great, sharp and contrasty, in fact they are both lenses that I use as my main wedding lenses, you should be able to easily find them on Ebay or the secondary market at the stores for less than $100.00 each.

I have shot Minolta in my business for over 20 years now, and most of the lenses I have used made by Minolta have been good glass with no problems.

Dave

 

[joeyk49]

With 35mm I'd expect the corners to get cut off long before you got to a donut.

No, its not really a donut... I was just a little exasperated when I wrote that. I lost a nice chunk of the corners on the shots where I was backed all the way up to 28mm.

So its sounds like its two lenses instead of one; a fixed WA and a decent midrange zoom, say 50 or 70ish to 200ish???

Why would you sell a lens that doesn't even cover the format that its made for? I understand how coverage would be an issue in large format, but not 35mm.

 

[joeyk49]

Thanks David...really neat shot there too..

I noticed the pincushion issue in mine as well. I guess that you can't ask for the world from an $80.00 lens...

 

[Dave Parker]

Joey,

Something weird is going on, I have looked as several reviews by users on this lens around the net and no one has mentioned the problem you are having, are you sure your not having a different problem? Are you using it with filters? I have seen normal thickness filters cause this problem even on manufacture lenses and had to go to a thin filter to prevent it.

Just wondering.

Dave

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I think the barrel/pincushion problem is unavoidable with tele-wide zooms for still cameras. The super high end zooms for cine and professional video cameras are in another league entirely, and maybe they aren't so bad at $100K+.

 

[rogueish]

I have the Sigma 28-135 macro and I have a serious vingetting also. It's so bad at the 28mm mark that the image is totally round, with or without a filter or lens shade. It starts just below the 38mm mark and increases as you go lower. It may be that it's only the AF lens, don't know about the manual ones.

I've heard some pretty good things about Tamron. I think their 70-300 zoom won some award 2 years ago. Been thinking about trading mine in for it. I hardly ever use the wide angle anyway.

 

[Ian Grant]

First I'll say I swear by Tamron SP or Vivitar S1 lenses and now have 4 Tamron & one Vivitar.

But new Tamron or Sigma lenses are now primarily aimed at the digital SLR market of which few cameras at present are full (35mm) frame. So that may well be the problem.

Personally I have stopped using 35mm completely, and apart from use as a diary I'd dropped 35mm as a serious medium 20+ years ago except for Rock concerts. But the specialist push processable E-6 films were the first to go . . .

I have 2 superb Tamron SP lenses, a 17 - 35mm f2.8 and a 28 -75mm f2.8, but they'll never get used with film.

Ian

 

[joeyk49]

Joey,

Something weird is going on, I have looked as several reviews by users on this lens around the net and no one has mentioned the problem you are having, are you sure your not having a different problem? Are you using it with filters? I have seen normal thickness filters cause this problem even on manufacture lenses and had to go to a thin filter to prevent it.

Just wondering.

Dave

Just a UV filter...nothing to interfere with the angle of view; not even a lens hood...
I'm not certain where it starts vignetting; probably somewhere around 35mm, but its damned annoying. Some of my shots can be enlarged to push the effect outside the print. But some of the landscapes (which is the primary reason for wanting the WA) are pretty much toast!

 

[Nick Zentena]

Try it without the filter. Can't hurt to take the filter off. If it's not a wide angle thin filter it might be the problem.