«

Hi everybody,

I am wondering if, in general, the distortions of a lens
on a DSLR are less (visible) compared its performance on an SLR ?
(because of the focal length & image size change)

I used to have a Sigma 28mm-105/F2.8-4 on a Minolta.
The super pros may not like the lens but I did:
Never again had as bright & vivid colors with `higher marked` lenses.
Not good however was the barral distortion & light fall-off
on the corners at the 28mm end.

Can I expect a better performance buying this lens again
and putting it on my Canon 300D ?

I hate to resort to getting a better rated but more expensive
28mm-135mm Tamron/Canon, because I might not stick with Canon
in the future when Minolta gets back on track.

Thanks for comments,

Tilman.

Since the focal plane of the 300D is less than 2/3 the width/height of 35mm
film, only the center portion of the field will be used. Generally the
barrel and pincusion distortions will drop off roughly with the square of
the FOV, so I would expect it to be only about 40% as bad as with 35mm film.
Vignetting will usually drop off even faster, and may be unnoticeable on the
300D. I'm not sure why that lens would give "bright & vivid colors," but if
you like it, go for it.

Don


"Tilman Kolk" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> Hi everybody,
>
> I am wondering if, in general, the distortions of a lens
> on a DSLR are less (visible) compared its performance on an SLR ?
> (because of the focal length & image size change)
>
> I used to have a Sigma 28mm-105/F2.8-4 on a Minolta.
> The super pros may not like the lens but I did:
> Never again had as bright & vivid colors with `higher marked` lenses.
> Not good however was the barral distortion & light fall-off
> on the corners at the 28mm end.
>
> Can I expect a better performance buying this lens again
> and putting it on my Canon 300D ?
>
> I hate to resort to getting a better rated but more expensive
> 28mm-135mm Tamron/Canon, because I might not stick with Canon
> in the future when Minolta gets back on track.
>
> Thanks for comments,
>
> Tilman.

You should be able to see the exact distortion to expect by examining images
you have already shot with the lens. Using a print of an image shot with
the lens, just view the cropped down area that would have been recorded by
the 300D and you will see exactly what to expect. That will work for the
distortion. However, other issues such as fall off and chromatic
abberations will probably be even more noticable with the 300D than they
were with film.

KB



"Tilman Kolk" <> wrote in message
news: om...
> Hi everybody,
>
> I am wondering if, in general, the distortions of a lens
> on a DSLR are less (visible) compared its performance on an SLR ?
> (because of the focal length & image size change)
>
> I used to have a Sigma 28mm-105/F2.8-4 on a Minolta.
> The super pros may not like the lens but I did:
> Never again had as bright & vivid colors with `higher marked` lenses.
> Not good however was the barral distortion & light fall-off
> on the corners at the 28mm end.
>
> Can I expect a better performance buying this lens again
> and putting it on my Canon 300D ?
>
> I hate to resort to getting a better rated but more expensive
> 28mm-135mm Tamron/Canon, because I might not stick with Canon
> in the future when Minolta gets back on track.
>
> Thanks for comments,
>
> Tilman.