Sigma 70-300mm Sony/Minolta mount lens - a warning
in [Digital Cameras]
|
Prev: Jupiter
Next: Commenting On Unused Equipment
From: SMS on 2 Nov 2009 07:29 Robert Coe wrote: > Does anybody actually buy Sigma's cameras? I'm pretty sure I've never seen > one. I have seen one, and apparently there were a few people that bought them. The list of issues with the SD10 was so long that it's hard to believe anyone would have chosen that over a Canon or Nikon, but apparently most of those customers had been using the Sigma film SLR and wanted to continue to use their Sigma mount lenses. The Foveon technology held great promise at the time it was introduced, but when they moved from three separate sensors to the stacked sensor with silicon color separation, it didn't work out.
From: Wolfgang Weisselberg on 2 Nov 2009 09:08 Nelson J <nj(a)address.net> wrote: > He always does that. Knows just enough from what he reads on the net to get > himself in trouble. [bla bla] Hello, P&S troll. -Wolfgang
From: Paul Furman on 5 Nov 2009 23:22 nospam wrote: > 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. I think the 14mm f/2.8 Sigma prime gets better reviews than the Nikon, or very close, or better in some respects and significantly cheaper. In this case the Sigma came years after the Nikon and Nikon now has a much better zoom. There are other examples of pro lenses like 300/2.8 where the Sigma performs very well for a fraction of the preposterous cost of the OEM. And old examples of Cult lenses from Tokina, Cosina, etc, or the Nikon Series E lenses that were supposed to be cheap and weren't given the Nikkor label but in fact were really great lenses. Lots of the third party Macro lenses are excellent. -- Paul Furman www.edgehill.net www.baynatives.com all google groups messages filtered due to spam
From: Robert Coe on 7 Nov 2009 23:13 On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 21:40:49 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote: : I have to agree Paul, I got a Sigma 12-24mm back in 2005 to use with my : D70, and other than some initial operator errors resulting in : vignetting, which I have now overcome, it has performed flawlesly ever : since on the D70 & my D300. : : I have since picked up a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 which is wonderful, sharp : and fast and the Sigma isn't getting much use now. Where did you find the Tokina? Both B&H and Adorama have had it back-ordered for months. Bob
From: Savageduck on 7 Nov 2009 23:24
On 2009-11-07 20:13:07 -0800, Robert Coe <bob(a)1776.COM> said: > On Tue, 3 Nov 2009 21:40:49 -0800, Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> > wrote: > : I have to agree Paul, I got a Sigma 12-24mm back in 2005 to use with my > : D70, and other than some initial operator errors resulting in > : vignetting, which I have now overcome, it has performed flawlesly ever > : since on the D70 & my D300. > : > : I have since picked up a Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 which is wonderful, sharp > : and fast and the Sigma isn't getting much use now. > > Where did you find the Tokina? Both B&H and Adorama have had it back-ordered > for months. > > Bob A friend got it for me overseas back in June. I had been trying to get a copy from those vendors also. -- Regards, Savageduck |