David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
No, but you'll see quite a few using them. Not the top news pros
you'll see gathered at major events, but lots and lots of the rest.
Sigma has made quite a few interesting lenses lately, including the
12-24mm full-frame zoom and the 10-20mm crop-factor zoom.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also Sigma has a lot more problems with Canon than with Nikon, from
what I've read.
That's because, as I understand it, since the Canon EF lanses do more
work than other brands they communicate more with the body. Sigma
didn't want to pay the license fees for this propietary interface and
tried to reverse engineer it.
Canon's bodies always are able to communicate with any EF lens and visa
versa. (The new EF-S lenses, if I remember correctly, is a mechanical
fit problem with all but the DSLRs they're designed for) Sigma's
problems were that when a new body was introduced the lens and body had
problems with this communication.
I think things changed when the HSM lenses were announced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This list is for educators, I've given my experience to those that
listen, if you have somthing to refute the thousands of Sigma users
who have had very bad issues with the lenses than speak up, if not
learn from what I've had to say and the same with countless others who
have gotten hosed buying cheaply built gear from Sigma.
Hmmmmmmm,
The header says " List For Photo/Imaging Educators - Professionals -
Students
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And lots of other people have benefitted greatly from being able to
get cheaper, high-quality lenses from Sigma. I've even got one Sigma
lens myself (the 105mm macro), and might well have gotten the 10-20mm
if it had been out a bit longer at the time I bought in that range (I
ended up with the Tokina 12-24mm f/4).
And a lot of people have been disappointed with photography because of
cheap lenses. Not just Sigma but many of the cheap lenses out there.
It has been said here, and elswhere, that the most important part of a
camera system is the lens. The lens has to do more than expose and move
film, or today, put the image onto the sensor for the correct amount of
time and store the image. The lens has to get a sharp, undistorted,
true color image to the film or sensor.
So if you put a cheap lens in front of an EOS-1Ds MkII which do you
blame for poor images?
A lot of sales people won't take the time to explain that and sell the
body and the glass that makes the most money for the store.
IMHO There is a difference between cheap and inexpensive, Inexpensive
implies similar quality at a lower price. Cheap implies lower quality
at a lower price.
Having typed all that, I believe that while there were a ton of problems
with older Sigma lenses, today's Sigmas are pretty good for the money.
You can't stay in business by turning out junk.
Bob
--
/////
( O O )
--------------------oOOO-----O----OOOo-----73 de w8imo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Curiosity killed the cat although I was a suspect for a while........
