Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 13, 2004, 12:43 AM   #11
Junior Member
 
JKAyres's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 20
Default

I have several Sigma lenses. They include a Sigma 20mm f1.8 EX DG, Sigma 170-500mm APO, Sigma 28mm f1.8 EX, and a Sigma 18-125mm DG. The 18-125mm seems to be the poorest performer of the group, but I like it much better than my Canon 18-55mm "kit" lens that came with my 300D and 20D. In most cases the lenses mentioned have performed better than I would have expected. I've been shopping around for a lens to replace the Sigma 18-125mm as my walk-around lens. At times I use my Canon EF 35mm f2 prime lens for a walk-around (which performs great).
I also (as others) believe that the Sigma "EX" series are equal to many of Canon's better lenses. Several years ago Sigma was considered to be a cheap 3rd class alternative, but they've come a long ways. Sigma has had their own digital SLR cameras on the market for a long time, but it took Minolta until now to offer one. Sigma has done a great job at staying competitive in the marketplace by offering high quality products. No, I don't work for Sigma.
JKAyres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 8:06 AM   #12
Senior Member
 
Setiprime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 484
Default

Seems like the consensus is

1) The high end Sigmas are VERY good in comparison

2) The 'non-pro' lenses are "iffy"

By the way, why do people insist on using the term '3rd party' lenses ?? They are actually 2nd party (someone other than OEM). just wondering.
Setiprime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 9:45 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 239
Default

The only thing I don't like about Sigma - especially on the New re-vamped 24-70mm 2.8 is they make too many lenses that take 82mm filters & those are Quite Expensive!

Hard-core Canon users ( get some of their ideas from Canon Reps) will tell you that #1. The Sigmas don't focus as fast as Canons & they don't do as well in low light.

My question to Sigma would be this:

Why re-make the 24-70mm 2.8 EX DG DF Macro (that's what B&H calls it) & not make a smaller filter size & why not make it HSM? Then it would be great! Note that this lens definately has my attention.

David
Railfire is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 10:09 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
sjms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,735
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:

Quote:
i agree on their macro lenses. been debating the 105 or 180.
Have you look @ their just released 150mm f/2.8 EX... (It's their only macro with USM) and lighter than the 180mm
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/Html/pages/150dg.htm

thanks for that info sounds like a good compromise. i'll be looking into it.

just looked it up the only thing i find amiss is the min f22 vs 32/45 for the others. i would have to see the DOF charts on it.
sjms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 11:27 AM   #15
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Setiprime wrote:
Quote:
By the way, why do people insist on using the term '3rd party' lenses ?? They are actually 2nd party (someone other than OEM). just wondering.
Technically it's '3rd party'... The 2nd party are the OEMs, for example the Tamron 17-35 is OEMed to Minolta (resold under a Minolta brand) while Minolta like Canon are the manufacturers (1st party)!
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 13, 2004, 12:51 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 378
Default

NHL wrote:
Quote:
Setiprime wrote:
Quote:
By the way, why do people insist on using the term '3rd party' lenses ?? They are actually 2nd party (someone other than OEM). just wondering.
Technically it's '3rd party'... The 2nd party are the OEMs, for example the Tamron 17-35 is OEMed to Minolta (resold under a Minolta brand) while Minolta like Canon are the manufacturers (1st party)!

I always thought "Third Party" meant a party other than you ("the party of the first part" and the original seller of the equipment ("the party of the second part"). So if you're buying any item related to the original purchase, but not from the original seller, that's a "third party sale."
perdendosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 17, 2004, 4:42 PM   #17
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 3
Default

I have both the Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 II macro super and the 55-200 F4-5.6 DC (both cost under £100 in the UK) and find them superb. No problem printing 24"x16" from either of them if you closed down a little (F8 ).




Mightyjohn is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 8:11 AM.