Sigma FD zooms

[mark_pierlot]

I'm wondering how Sigma FD-mount zoom lenses, specifically the 28-84mm f/3.5

and the 70-210mm f/3.5, compare to their genuine FD counterparts. The reason

I'm asking is that I just picked up a second F-1N body (for a steal), and the

Sigmas came as part of the deal. I'll hang on to them if they're any good, but

would appreciate some advice before I do any test shooting with them.

[awahlster]

This is only my experience and opinion so take for what you want.

 

EVERY Sigma lens I have used over the last 30+ years except the 600mm f8.0 Mirror SUCKED and I would have to say the Zooms SUCKED the most. I had a 400mm f5.6 APO that was the worst telephoto I have ever used. I've had for very short periods of time (like a single roll of film long) had 3-4 different zooms. And one wide a 28mm I think None of them were worth keeping. And now none of them are worth selling.

 

In third party lenses Tokina, Tamron, Kiron, And those sold by Vivitar made by Tokina and Kiron have been the ones to try.

 

Though I do have a rare little Soligar 24-45mm f3.5/4.5 CD zoom I quite like for what it is. Other Soligar's I've had were very uninspired

[tom_smith22]

I have a Soligar 300mm /4. Is this a good brand? I had never heard of it before I got the lens.

[Lou_Meluso]

Hi Mark: The world is flooded with decent, inexpensive zoom lenses for Canon FD. The Sigma's I've tried over the years were not the best of the group in either build or optical quality and the QC was more variable. Sigma seems to provide better products today for the EOS system. I shoot mostly fixed focal length now but I own a cute little Tokina SD 28-70mm f3.5-4.5 that I picked up for $20.00 that slow but is surprisingly crisp and a Vivitar S1 70-210mm f2.8-4 (version 3 Komine) that's has remarkable quality for the money ($45).I've owned Tamron and Kiron Zooms that were very good too. Natch, all the Canon zooms are decent and so affordable now. On the practical side you do already own these so....just shoot a roll or two, maybe you got some good ones. Keep an open mind. Sometimes sub par optics can yeild interesting results. Selling them won't bring much so, if not up to snuff, consider getting a a cheap FD body, and donating them to a youngster who doesn't have a camera. Add in a few lessons and start a kid off right to the joys of Canon photography. What's junk to you will be gold to them. The look on their faces as you hand them their new kit is worth it.

[steve_kennedy3]

Tom, I have a Soligor 350mm 4.5 that is very sharp. Even with a 2x-B the photos are more than acceptable. Good luck with your 300mm.

[pvp]

There are many 3rd party (non-Canon) lenses that were made in FD mount. Many of them are very good.<P>

 

IMO, <u>all of them</u> are still inferior to the real thing.

[mark_pierlot]

Thanks for all the advice. I sold the Sigmas before wasting any film shooting with them.

[joe_nash1]

I agree with all those above. The Canon FD 70-210mm F/4 is one of a heck a nice lens, and I think they are going pretty cheap these days.

[peter_ronai]

Hi Mark,

I had good experiences with Sigma on EOS, so I bought a Sigma 35/2.8 fix lens. This lens - after my test - proved to be the worst from all of my lenses. After this, I did not try Sigma on FD again...

I have for FD a Tokina RMC 80-200/4, which is a fine lens IMHO.

I have Vivitar Series I 70-210/3.5 macro (the Kiron one) but the tokina is sharper and it has a slight blue color... + bulky and heavy.

And lastly I now have Canon FD 80-200/4, but I have no tried yet.

First it must be repeared...

 

B.T.W. Has anyone some experiences with this Canon zoom?

If yes, what kind?

 

Cheers,

Peter

[mark_pierlot]

Thanks for your response, Peter. It seems that I did the right thing dumping the Sigma zooms. I tend to prefer primes, but I do have a few zooms: FD 80-200mm f/4 SSC, FDn 80-200mm f/4 L, FDn 35-105mm Macro f/3.5, FD 35-70mm Macro f/2.8-3.5 SSC (not the inferior 35-70mm f/3.5), and FDn 20-35mm 1:3.5 L. I've obtained excellent results with all of them. In the 80-200mm range, the FDn L is sharper than the non-L, and is considered to be one of the finest zooms Canon has ever made. The 80-200mm L was not as expensive as other FD L lenses when they were in production, and can be had relatively cheaply today.

[gnashings]

The 80-200 f4L is a gem, and a steal. I too prefer primes, but that lens absolutely astonished me with its quality. Prior to that, I had the 70-210 f4 nFD and thought it was great until I tried the L. I can honestly say, the quality difference truly surprised me. the non L lens was very good. I doubted the L would be that much better in any but most critical and controlled circuimstances... but it was. Very much a steal and I would highly reccomend one.

[gnashings]

Damn, wish they had an "eidt" button!

One more thing - I think that high end zooms tend to outperform their more common cousins by far wider a margin than hi-buck primes compared to the economical versions. The difference has been, in my experience, far more dramatic.

[mark_pierlot]

I definitely concur with your last claim, Peter. The difference between, say, the FDn 50mm f/1.4 and the FDn 50mm f/1.2 L is demonstrable but not huge, but the difference between regular FD zooms and L zooms is huge. The one exception seems to be the FDn 35-105mm f/3.5, which is superb, but of course there's no L counterpart in that focal range with which to compare it. Another non-L zoom that I love is the original 1973 FD 35-70mm f/2.8-3.5 SSC, which blows away the slower FD 35-70 zooms (lenses which are, admittedly, among the worst of the FD's).

[andreas_grimm]

Hi!

 

This is my first comment in this intresting forum. I com from Germany and I have e nice FD-equipment, as there are A-1, AE-1P, 2/24, 2/35, 1.4/50, 1.8/85 and 2.8/200 (all FDn), and Tokina 2,8/24-40.

A few weeks ago I have seen a Sigma FD 2.8/28-70. I could be a lens for everyday use or travelling, but I could not find anything about this lens. Does anybody of You know something about this lens?

Regards

Andreas

[mark_pierlot]

Hello Andreas. Welcome to the Canon FD forum! Judging by the response I received to my question about the quality of Sigma FD zooms, I'd say they're all pretty bad. If you want a good zoom for everyday and travelling use, you should get an FDn 35-105mm f/3.5. They're highly regarded, and not too expensive. Another great shorter zoom is the original FD 35-70mm f/2.8-3.5 (not to be confused with the poor FDn 35-70mm f/3.5), but they're quite rare these days and therefore hard to find.