Lenses

[duehew]

I have been hearing that Sigma lenses are not of very good quality. Is this in fact true or just someones opinion? I have been thinking of getting a sigma lens for my D-3200 and was looking at Sigma and Tamron. I have a Sigma lens that I use to use with my Minolta XG-7 which I thought worked just great. I am an amateur that just loves taking pictures and am not a pro. I currently use an 18-55 mm and a 55-300 mm and am looking at an 18-300 mm. What are some suggestions? Thank you.

Du

 

[Didereaux]

The first thing to learn is how to type your question into GOOGLE. This one might be "Sigma lens review" (but substitute the specific lens into the query) read the professional reviews and then make up your mind. I doubt that it is an exaggeration that 99% of all internet users are ignoramuses on almost all subjects.

 

[robbins.photo]

I have been hearing that Sigma lenses are not of very good quality. Is this in fact true or just someones opinion? I have been thinking of getting a sigma lens for my D-3200 and was looking at Sigma and Tamron. I have a Sigma lens that I use to use with my Minolta XG-7 which I thought worked just great. I am an amateur that just loves taking pictures and am not a pro. I currently use an 18-55 mm and a 55-300 mm and am looking at an 18-300 mm. What are some suggestions? Thank you.

Du

In the old days Sigma did get a bad rep for having lenses that seemed to be fairly inconsistent. If you got a "good" copy of a lens it worked fine, but their quality control wasn't really the best and as a result more than a few people it seemed would end up with a "bad" copy of a lens that wouldn't work quite as well as advertised. That doesn't seem to be the case anymore, though it should be noted that neither Sigma nor Tamron will hold their resell value as well as a name brand lens will.

My experience with both Sigma and Tamron has been a good one overall, I use a Sigma 70-200 MM OS 2.8 and I have two Tamrons, a 70-300 mm 4.5-5.6 VR and a 17-50 mm 2.8, and all three have been excellent lenses for me. Never had any issues with any of them, and I get good image quality out of all three.

This was shot with my Tamron 70-300 mm VR:

20150907 III 144 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

Both of these were shot with the Sigma 70-200 MM 2.8, wide open at 2.8:

HD Zoo 372 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

HD Zoo 310 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

 

[duehew]

The first thing to learn is how to type your question into GOOGLE. This one might be "Sigma lens review" (but substitute the specific lens into the query) read the professional reviews and then make up your mind. I doubt that it is an exaggeration that 99% of all internet users are ignoramuses on almost all subjects.

Just what I was thinking as I liked the Sigma I use to use. Thank you for your reply.

 

[duehew]

I have been hearing that Sigma lenses are not of very good quality. Is this in fact true or just someones opinion? I have been thinking of getting a sigma lens for my D-3200 and was looking at Sigma and Tamron. I have a Sigma lens that I use to use with my Minolta XG-7 which I thought worked just great. I am an amateur that just loves taking pictures and am not a pro. I currently use an 18-55 mm and a 55-300 mm and am looking at an 18-300 mm. What are some suggestions? Thank you.

Du

In the old days Sigma did get a bad rep for having lenses that seemed to be fairly inconsistent. If you got a "good" copy of a lens it worked fine, but their quality control wasn't really the best and as a result more than a few people it seemed would end up with a "bad" copy of a lens that wouldn't work quite as well as advertised. That doesn't seem to be the case anymore, though it should be noted that neither Sigma nor Tamron will hold their resell value as well as a name brand lens will.

My experience with both Sigma and Tamron has been a good one overall, I use a Sigma 70-200 MM OS 2.8 and I have two Tamrons, a 70-300 mm 4.5-5.6 VR and a 17-50 mm 2.8, and all three have been excellent lenses for me. Never had any issues with any of them, and I get good image quality out of all three.

This was shot with my Tamron 70-300 mm VR:

20150907 III 144 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

Both of these were shot with the Sigma 70-200 MM 2.8, wide open at 2.8:

HD Zoo 372 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

HD Zoo 310 by Todd Robbins, on Flickr

Awesome photographs. Thanks for the wise input.

 

[robbins.photo]

Awesome photographs. Thanks for the wise input.

No worries, always happy to help. The Sigma 70-200 mm is probably my most used lens, it works extremely well for the kind of shooting I normally do so it gets a ton of use. One odd thing to note however, I usually shut the OS feature off unless I'm actually shooting at very slow shutter speeds, which is a rarity for me really. I've noticed that if I leave the OS (optical stabilization) on it tries to occasionally activate even at higher shutter speeds, which results in a blurry shot. If I shut it off of course it works fantastic. From what I understand it is a problem with some of the older OS sigma lenses due to a change in the firmware made by Nikon at some point. I could address the issue by sending my lens in and having it's firmware updated by Sigma, but I've never bothered. A lot easier just to switch off the OS feature unless it's really needed.

 

[duehew]

Awesome photographs. Thanks for the wise input.

No worries, always happy to help. The Sigma 70-200 mm is probably my most used lens, it works extremely well for the kind of shooting I normally do so it gets a ton of use. One odd thing to note however, I usually shut the OS feature off unless I'm actually shooting at very slow shutter speeds, which is a rarity for me really. I've noticed that if I leave the OS (optical stabilization) on it tries to occasionally activate even at higher shutter speeds, which results in a blurry shot. If I shut it off of course it works fantastic. From what I understand it is a problem with some of the older OS sigma lenses due to a change in the firmware made by Nikon at some point. I could address the issue by sending my lens in and having it's firmware updated by Sigma, but I've never bothered. A lot easier just to switch off the OS feature unless it's really needed.

Thank you all for your great advice. I am trying to be a sponge and learn all I can from everyone's great advice. I wish I could select more than one icon as there are a couple I would select.

 

[robbins.photo]

Awesome photographs. Thanks for the wise input.

No worries, always happy to help. The Sigma 70-200 mm is probably my most used lens, it works extremely well for the kind of shooting I normally do so it gets a ton of use. One odd thing to note however, I usually shut the OS feature off unless I'm actually shooting at very slow shutter speeds, which is a rarity for me really. I've noticed that if I leave the OS (optical stabilization) on it tries to occasionally activate even at higher shutter speeds, which results in a blurry shot. If I shut it off of course it works fantastic. From what I understand it is a problem with some of the older OS sigma lenses due to a change in the firmware made by Nikon at some point. I could address the issue by sending my lens in and having it's firmware updated by Sigma, but I've never bothered. A lot easier just to switch off the OS feature unless it's really needed.

Thank you all for your great advice. I am trying to be a sponge and learn all I can from everyone's great advice. I wish I could select more than one icon as there are a couple I would select.

Photography is funny that way, the more you learn the more you realize you've still got so much more to learn

 

[xenskhe]

I have been hearing that Sigma lenses are not of very good quality. Is this in fact true or just someones opinion?

It's a opinion - a vague, generalised statement. I've owned mediocre Sigma lenses, ones that were pretty ok, and one in particular that was excellent, as good as any Nikon or Contax zoom I've had.

 

[Dao]

Quality of a lens is a relative terms. Some Sigma lenses are not as good as the OEM (i.e. Nikon, Canon) while some of them are better.

It is better to compare lenses that belong to the similar group. i.e. 70-200mm f/2.8 group, 17-50mm f/2.8 group or 50mm f/1.4 group.


In fact, there are people out there replace their Nikon or Canon 50mm f/1.4 lens with the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art lens because they believe the Sigma version is better than their Canon or Nikon one.

 

[paigew]

I have two sigma art lenses. 35 & 50 they are both super sharp and fast. Just as sharp as some of my L lenses.

Edit to add I also have the canon 50 1.4 and the sigma art is WAY more reliable.