Ignorance? Or a Concise Hatred of Third Party Lens Manufacturers?

[D-B-J]

I hope you get a chuckle out of it like I did...

Sigma 35mm f 1.4 Review

Jake

 

[jsecordphoto]

you should hear some of the wildlife crowd...if it's not a nikon/canon 5 or 600mm f4, it's only a toy

 

[D-B-J]

you should hear some of the wildlife crowd...if it's not a nikon/canon 5 or 600mm f4, it's only a toy

Not to get start a riot, but I'm all about optics, but on a budget. Like, the I tested/rented the Tamron 70-200 2.8VC before I purchased it, and decided that there's NO WAY the Nikon VRII is an entire thousand dollars sharper... That's the cost of a sigma 35 art!

Jake

 

[runnah]

You should both know by now that the camera world is full of people filled with more opinions than facts and more biases than research.

But to be fair, tamron and sigma not sucking has been a recent development that some of the more seasoned photographers are having a hard time getting their heads around. Same as if McDonald's suddenly became a 5-star restaurant.

 

[rexbobcat]

I'm surprised his head didn't explode when he reviewed older Tokina lenses.

"It...It's third-party...but...it lasts...forever...does not...compute..."

 

[JimMcClain]

I've got no interest in the opinion of Ken Rockwell. He admits to making stuff up, not fact-checking and not caring. He stumbled into Internet fame not because he's knowledgeable about photography, but because he got lucky with search engines.