Sigma

[Scatterbrained]

Time to switch to Canon.

 

[Derrel]

Time to switch to Canon.

Sigma's yellow rendering looks good on Canon d-slrs. It really does! I own a few Siggy's, in both Canon and Nikon mounts. The Nikon mount models have all been beset by focus problems that developed when the D2x and D200 generation hit the market. 100-300mm f/4 EX HSM; 180mm f/3.5 APO Macro EX HSM; both are unreliable as f*** when it comes to focusing properly, and seem to go on insane rear-focusing "hunts" at critical times, multiple times per day...

The behavior is so annoying...the lenses will be focused, and I'll press the shutter release, and the lenses will just go, "Dzzzzzt!" and be back-focused 20,30,40 meters behind easy, obvious focus targets. Making the lenses basically very hard to depend upon. It's like a slow-motion auto accident...everything is fine,fine,fine, and then as I press the shutter release, the focus just zippppps backward....

The 80-400 OS in Canon mount is decent, and the 18-125 DC flares like a bastard, but it's a cheap lens for APS-C.

 

[hamlet]

After some back and forth i have decided to stick with my 105 os sigma. I will now consider this compatibility problem in future lens purchases, but the thing about this is: nobody here ever mentioned this problem, so it must not be that big of a problem if even Nikon users aren't complaining when recommending lenses to beginners. Am i wrong about this?

 

[TheNevadanStig]

All I can say is I own a D3200, fully updated, and one of the cheapest non-usb Sigma lenses. It all works great together, I love the lens, and I wouldn't hesitate to buy another one from Sigma. I REALLY want their 150-500.

 

[robbins.photo]

Well I've got a 70-200 mm Sigma - the OS version. Never had any focus problems or any other problems with the lens, it's worked beautifully since the day I bought it. My experience may not be the norm, but all I can base my opinion on is my own personal experience which has been just fine.

It is true that Nikon will sometimes change their system intentionally to try to make it less compatible with non-Nikkor lenses. When the D5300 came out apparently they did just that, but on the upside Sigma did offer a free firmware upgrade to help correct the problem.

So all in all I've been happy with my Sigma lens, and I wouldn't have a huge problem with purchasing another.

 

[Derrel]

After some back and forth i have decided to stick with my 105 os sigma. I will now consider this compatibility problem in future lens purchases, but the thing about this is: nobody here ever mentioned this problem, so it must not be that big of a problem if even Nikon users aren't complaining when recommending lenses to beginners. Am i wrong about this?

Read the links provided above, the two by Thom Hogan, and the one on dPreview, and yes, you'll see that there is an issue you seem to be missing. The issue is with Sigma lenses and Nikon cameras with malfunctioning autofocus, live view focus issues, and problems with optical stabilization not working properly on NEW Nikon models, models which are not very common here (the Df and the D5300), not with Canon cameras.

Most owners here will heartily recommend much of what they have personally bought; a sort of "do as I did," kind of mentality, a way of justifying thetr choices in their own minds. We seldom hear about people who buy a product and admit it was a mistake, or that it was of sub-par quality or less-than-satisfactory.

 

[robbins.photo]

After some back and forth i have decided to stick with my 105 os sigma. I will now consider this compatibility problem in future lens purchases, but the thing about this is: nobody here ever mentioned this problem, so it must not be that big of a problem if even Nikon users aren't complaining when recommending lenses to beginners. Am i wrong about this?

Read the links provided above, the two by Thom Hogan, and the one on dPreview, and yes, you'll see that there is an issue you seem to be missing. The issue is with Sigma lenses and Nikon cameras with malfunctioning autofocus, live view focus issues, and problems with optical stabilization not working properly on NEW Nikon models, models which are not very common here (the Df and the D5300), not with Canon cameras.

Most owners here will heartily recommend much of what they have personally bought; a sort of "do as I did," kind of mentality, a way of justifying thetr choices in their own minds. We seldom hear about people who buy a product and admit it was a mistake, or that it was of sub-par quality or less-than-satisfactory.

I guess I'm not most people. I have zero need to justify anything I purchase to anyone. I could care less if anyone else buys Sigma or not, as I just bought a lens from them, not stock in the company. All I can report is my own personal experience with the lens I have, and in this case I've never seen a yellowish cast, never had any sort of autofocus issues, the lens has worked well for me personally.

I would imagine that at least a few others must have had similar experiences or I doubt Sigma would still be in business. Granted for long term compatibility Nikkor is a no doubt a better option. But make no mistake about it, if I had problems with the Sigma I purchased I'd have no problems in recommending that others avoid purchasing one.

As it is though my experience has been a positive one. If I could afford a Nikkor 70-200 mm F/2.8, heck yes I'd love to own one. But it's a bit out of my budget range at least for now, so for me the Sigma is a good option at this point in time. Will I still be using it 20 years from now? Who knows, only time will tell I suppose. I'm guessing by then I'll probably have upgraded to a Nikkor - but regardless for now at least it's getting the job done.

If it weren't, I wouldn't obfuscate that fact and try to convince others to purchase one just so I could feel better about my purchase. I'm just not that sort of a person, at all.

 

[Scatterbrained]

After some back and forth i have decided to stick with my 105 os sigma. I will now consider this compatibility problem in future lens purchases, but the thing about this is: nobody here ever mentioned this problem, so it must not be that big of a problem if even Nikon users aren't complaining when recommending lenses to beginners. Am i wrong about this?

.........................
Most owners here will heartily recommend much of what they have personally bought; a sort of "do as I did," kind of mentality, a way of justifying thetr choices in their own minds. We seldom hear about people who buy a product and admit it was a mistake, or that it was of sub-par quality or less-than-satisfactory.

I disagree. If anything the internet "echo chamber" tends to exacerbate problems and issues you otherwise wouldn't even know about otherwise. People who are happy with what they've bought will tell you that if you ask, people who are unhappy with what they've bought will tell you and everyone else whether you want to know or not.

 

[bratkinson]

When your company is the market maker/leader, it is simply a good business decision to change to protocol on a regular basis. I've personally seen this happen in everything from subsequent versions of Canon cameras (remember the FD mount?), Windows, Adobe products, Epson printers, and countless other technology.

In most cases, the new protocols are somewhat required due to technological advances...Look at the succession of digital cameras and their ever-changing RAW file format/coding/protocols. Is it that there is something actually different about the string of zeros and ones within the image itself? Perhaps. Is there a need for more EXIF information from the camera to match the increased number of features in the new camera? Very likely. How many here have personally encountered problems processing RAW files from their brand new camera using the older version of Adobe Lightroom they bought 3 years prior? How could Adobe possibly know in advance exactly what the RAW output of the newest/latest/greatest camera from XYZ would produce? As a result, Adobe has to do some quick reverse-engineering to figure out what's different and incorporate the corresponding software updates in an update to their products. It's no different with automobiles. Every year, the after-market companies have to quickly redesign their parts just to keep up with the changes Detroit and Japan have implemented.

But the other reason for changing the protocol is to keep your market share. If every Nikon or Canon camera made used the exact same protocol or firmware in their cameras for the last 20 years, how long before everything they do is easily copied at a reduced cost? (not much R&D in copying someone elses' designs). How long would Nikon or Canon stay in business if they can't make a buck selling lenses? Or batteries? By making something just a little different, now the 3rd party manufacturers have to scramble to be compatible again. But what about that xxx lens you bought to use on your Nikon 10 years ago, now you've upgraded to the latest and best camera from Nikon. How can xxx company know 10 years in advance what Nikon would produce?

So whether your 3rd party lens will or will not work on your latest camera 10 years from now is a shot in the dark. What if Canon decides to come up with an EF/2 lens mount for their DSLRs in the future?

 

[hamlet]

After some back and forth i have decided to stick with my 105 os sigma. I will now consider this compatibility problem in future lens purchases, but the thing about this is: nobody here ever mentioned this problem, so it must not be that big of a problem if even Nikon users aren't complaining when recommending lenses to beginners. Am i wrong about this?

Read the links provided above, the two by Thom Hogan, and the one on dPreview, and yes, you'll see that there is an issue you seem to be missing. The issue is with Sigma lenses and Nikon cameras with malfunctioning autofocus, live view focus issues, and problems with optical stabilization not working properly on NEW Nikon models, models which are not very common here (the Df and the D5300), not with Canon cameras.

Most owners here will heartily recommend much of what they have personally bought; a sort of "do as I did," kind of mentality, a way of justifying thetr choices in their own minds. We seldom hear about people who buy a product and admit it was a mistake, or that it was of sub-par quality or less-than-satisfactory.

So long as my aperture keeps working all this is fine. The aperture is something i cant change manually.

 

[hamlet]

Also here is an article i found that states that: Sigma to make their USB dock compatible with older lenses.

 

[robbins.photo]

So whether your 3rd party lens will or will not work on your latest camera 10 years from now is a shot in the dark. What if Canon decides to come up with an EF/2 lens mount for their DSLRs in the future?

Very true. One thing I also thought about last evening, what sort of camera body will I most likely be using 10 years from now, or even 20? If the 36 mp D800 will be considered antiquated by then, what are the odds that I'd even want to be using the same lenses I have now at that point considering that they probably will be woefully inadequate when paired with the technology that will be available in 20 years?

 

[hamlet]

So whether your 3rd party lens will or will not work on your latest camera 10 years from now is a shot in the dark. What if Canon decides to come up with an EF/2 lens mount for their DSLRs in the future?

Very true. One thing I also thought about last evening, what sort of camera body will I most likely be using 10 years from now, or even 20? If the 36 mp D800 will be considered antiquated by then, what are the odds that I'd even want to be using the same lenses I have now at that point considering that they probably will be woefully inadequate when paired with the technology that will be available in 20 years?

While none of derrels points are really invalidated by any of what we are saying, from what i've seen in recent technological advancements in science, you won't want to use any of the equipment in 20 years.

 

[480sparky]

While none of derrels points are really invalidated by any of what we are saying, from what i've seen in recent technological advancements in science, you won't want to use any of the equipment in 20 years.

It all boils down to: You pays your money and you takes your chances.

 

[hamlet]

While none of derrels points are really invalidated by any of what we are saying, from what i've seen in recent technological advancements in science, you won't want to use any of the equipment in 20 years.

It all boils down to: You pays your money and you takes your chances.

Yes, i completely agree. And the way we can improve our odds of success is by alerting fellow photographers to lenses that fail to work. I will now include this variable when i personally recommend a lens to someone or for myself.