Sigma 70-300mm Sony/Minolta mount lens - a warning
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Jupiter
Next: Commenting On Unused Equipment
From: nospam on 24 Oct 2009 15:21 In article <7kgpupF381s54U1(a)mid.individual.net>, michael adams <mjadams25(a)onetel.net.uk> wrote: > When I first read that link last year - the most interesting question > to me apart from the inordinate lengths they're going to blacken Sigma's > reputation, is the fact that the company in question is based in Cordova > Tennessee. Which with all due respect to Tennesseans is surely hardly > anyone's idea of the lens hiring capital of the US, or of the world for > that matter. what difference does that make? it's a mail order operation. the only thing that matters is that they have inventory to meet demand and near a shipping facility (i.e., not in the middle of montana). > Other than this outfit most of the big lens hirers appear to be over the > counter outfits in big cities linked top retailers which branched out into > mail hire with the growth of the internet. there's plenty of opportunity for more than one lens rental service. > I'm surprised that nobody has ever stopped to question any of this. there's nothing to question, that's why. > None of the other - mostly OTC big city - hirers websites who I checked both > in the US and UK appear to have any problem with Sigma lenses at all. And from > memory one big seller in the UK offers all lenses including Sigma on 2 weeks > approval prior to purchase. maybe they would just assume take your money rather than being honest.
From: John Navas on 24 Oct 2009 15:47 On Sat, 24 Oct 2009 11:51:11 -0400, me <me(a)mine.net> wrote in <ie86e5dso2kr7v05c2ajdd9i9r8bhnan6b(a)4ax.com>: >On Fri, 23 Oct 2009 11:58:04 -0700, John Navas ><spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>Amen. You tend to get what you pay for. > >Not a 100% rule to follow. I'm happy with my Tokina AT-X 124 DX Pro >12-24mm f4 lens, which is substantially cheaper than the Nikon >equivalent. Yes, it's not and AF-S lens, but I couldn't justify the >delta cost for that. If it's good enough for you, that's all that matters, but I've personally yet to see a case where a good OEM prime didn't significantly outperform cheaper non-OEM lenses. -- Best regards, John Buying a dSLR doesn't make you a photographer, it makes you a dSLR owner. "The single most important component of a camera is the twelve inches behind it." -Ansel Adams
From: nospam on 24 Oct 2009 15:51 In article <vbm6e5pki52sitr9mhpv7a8ffe4u1rjioo(a)4ax.com>, John Navas <spamfilter1(a)navasgroup.com> wrote: > >>Amen. You tend to get what you pay for. > > > >Not a 100% rule to follow. I'm happy with my Tokina AT-X 124 DX Pro > >12-24mm f4 lens, which is substantially cheaper than the Nikon > >equivalent. Yes, it's not and AF-S lens, but I couldn't justify the > >delta cost for that. > > If it's good enough for you, that's all that matters, but I've > personally yet to see a case where a good OEM prime didn't significantly > outperform cheaper non-OEM lenses. perhaps you need to get out more, and he's not talking about single focal length lenses anyway.
From: michael adams on 24 Oct 2009 16:17 "nospam" <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> wrote in message news:241020091221288409%nospam(a)nospam.invalid... > In article <7kgpupF381s54U1(a)mid.individual.net>, michael adams > <mjadams25(a)onetel.net.uk> wrote: > > > When I first read that link last year - the most interesting question > > to me apart from the inordinate lengths they're going to blacken Sigma's > > reputation, is the fact that the company in question is based in Cordova > > Tennessee. Which with all due respect to Tennesseans is surely hardly > > anyone's idea of the lens hiring capital of the US, or of the world for > > that matter. > > what difference does that make? it's a mail order operation. the only > thing that matters is that they have inventory to meet demand and near > a shipping facility (i.e., not in the middle of montana). > > > Other than this outfit most of the big lens hirers appear to be over the > > counter outfits in big cities linked top retailers which branched out into > > mail hire with the growth of the internet. > > there's plenty of opportunity for more than one lens rental service. > > > I'm surprised that nobody has ever stopped to question any of this. > > there's nothing to question, that's why. > > > None of the other - mostly OTC big city - hirers websites who I checked both > > in the US and UK appear to have any problem with Sigma lenses at all. And from > > memory one big seller in the UK offers all lenses including Sigma on 2 weeks > > approval prior to purchase. > > maybe they would just assume take your money rather than being honest. Sure thing. All the over the counter operations who have to deal face to face with their customers on a daily basis are likely to rip them off. While an outfit in an industrial estate right next to the airport in Hicksville Tennessee, maybe a 1000 miles away, most definitely won't. michael adams ....
From: nospam on 24 Oct 2009 16:20
In article <7kh5gdF39pn9jU1(a)mid.individual.net>, michael adams <mjadams25(a)onetel.net.uk> wrote: > Sure thing. All the over the counter operations who have to deal face to face > with > their customers on a daily basis are likely to rip them off. While an outfit > in an > industrial estate right next to the airport in Hicksville Tennessee, maybe a 1000 > miles away, most definitely won't. what makes you think these over the counter operations don't tell the customer that they should rent a nikon/canon lens instead? or that the sigma is 'out of stock' when it really means they're all broken? maybe the store stocks 1 sigma lens for every 10 nikon/canon lenses, just to appease the sigma fanbois who require sigma for some reason. |