Black Sigma 400/5.6 Apo (non Macro) (minolta mount)

[charles_reid]

Does anyone have any experience with this lens? I've heard pretty random things

about them. The black bodies are supposed to be better than the white and the

macro the best quality. It looks like an ideal lens (for the price) but i want a

sharp lens hence the prime. Any experience? Thoughts?

 

Im looking for a 300 VERY bright or 400+ 4-5.6 thats very sharp Manual focus

preferably for under 500. Id pay 1000 for a really good 400+ but from what ive

seen so far you dont gain much after the $5-600 range until you get to the

multiple thousands. For instance id go for the Bigma etc but from what ive read

they pretty much suck at what they're supposed to be good at.. long zoom and

wide open.

[steve_dawson1]

I used to use a Sigma 400mm f5.6 (non APO) and it was one of the worst lenses I have ever had. Very poor contrast and not at all sharp. But that remark is not very much use to you because I have read that the APO version was much improved and I have no experience of that. What I do use though is a 300mm F4 Nikkor AF and that is really quite nice - sharp at all apertures except wide open and sharp into the corners. Also it works well with a Kenko 1.4 teleconverter. I also have a 300mm f4.5 Nikkor manual focus lens which seems to have quite a poor reputation, but my sample is about as good as the AF one. Both are hugely better than the Sigma I had - though, as I say, that was not the APO version and may have been a poor sample.

[mjferron]

I've read that the Sigma 400 APO macro was a big improvement over earlier lenses.

[charles_reid]

Thanks steve and Micheal. Theres one on ebay for about 150. Pretty bloody cheap. Im taking a big chance currently on a 300/2.8 which i imagine is not in very good shape.. but thats a $$$$$$ lens for cheap. If it sucks im going to try to track down one of the sigmas and give it a shot.