Happy enigma about crappy Sigma

Discussion in 'Australia Photography' started by Sosumi, Jan 9, 2008.

  1. Sosumi

    TH O Guest

    LOL. Just like Sigma's $280 profit.
     
    TH O, Jan 11, 2008
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. I have 2 Sigmas and have not had any issues with either of them.
    Replaced the 18-135 with an 18-200 OS HSM just for the extra reach and
    the OS.
    The salesman and I had the Nikon 18-200 VR & the Sigma 18-200 OS HSM out
    on the counter ... the Nikon was over R2000,00 ( +/- $300 )more. He let
    me take both into the garden / car park and take some shots. I took 3
    shots at 3 various focal lengths from each lens. ( Agreed .... it was
    not a really technical test .... just similar to my regular style of
    shooting ) After printing them out on 6x4 paper nobody behind the
    counter was able to tell the difference between the Nikon and the Sigma.
    That, plus the fact I never had any problems with the previous Sigma was
    enough to persuade me to choose the Sigma. Just as an aside, the Nikon
    distributors here in South Africa have huge mark ups on their products,
    I know that for a fact as I have bought from retailers such as B&H in NY
    and the products have landed here via courier cheaper than buying local.
    I held up a Nikon D300 yesterday, the price sticker was R30 000,00 ( $4
    400,00 ) does that figure sound about right in the US ... just curious ?
    Bernard
     
    Bernard Rother, Jan 11, 2008
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Sosumi

    Paul Furman Guest

    More like $1,700 US

    I have 1 Sigma lens, a 12-24 full frame (that I'd like to try on full
    frame) and my only complaint is the foam tape on the slide-on cap peeled
    off. Oh it does have some minor incompatibility with my D200 which isn't
    worth sending in to update.
     
    Paul Furman, Jan 11, 2008
    #23
  4. Sosumi

    jean Guest

    At 4" x 6" anything looks good. Check both lenses full size on your
    computer monitor and you may be surprised. The best way to go about it is
    to shoot the same scene with the camera on a tripod at the same focal lenght
    (or close enough) with the same settings and flip between two similar shots
    from the two lenses or have the two pictures displayed side by side. If you
    are going to pay good money for a lens, get a good one... no, get a great
    one, you will never regret your purchase.

    Jean
     
    jean, Jan 11, 2008
    #24
  5. Hi Jean, I still have those pics on the PC and still prefer the Sigma
    results. Any ideas how one can post the pics on the web while retaining
    the EXIF data ? When I post them I'll call them "A" and "B" and you can
    take a gander before before checking the EXIFs.
    Bernard.
     
    Bernard Rother, Jan 11, 2008
    #25
  6. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest


    Really? How would you know?

    Have you tested them on an optical bench?

    Sigma knows that the vast majority of its customers will simply
    believe the magazine and web reviews, and never test their own lenses.
    And the vast majority of Sigma owners will be perfectly happy with
    lenses that display serious flaws when bench tested.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #26
  7. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest

    So the opinion of the *sales staff* was that the Sigma was just as
    good as the Nikkor?

    Of course they would say that, because they make far more money
    selling you a Sigma lens!
    The Sigma mark-ups are even bigger! Here in the UK, the percentage
    mark-up on Sigma lenses is more than double, and sometimes treble the
    mark-up on camera brand lenses, especially Nikon and Canon.

    So the sales staff love selling Sigma lenses, because they are far,
    far more profitable.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #27
  8. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest


    It's amazing how easy it is to con people.

    When it comes to dressing up a mediocre product to make it look
    expensive, Sigma are top of the tree.

    Their lenses sell for less than camera brand lenses because they are
    very cheaply made.

    The camera stores love them because they have the highest mark-up of
    any brand of lens. The dealer's margin is at least double and often
    treble that of a Nikon, Canon or other camera brand lens.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #28
  9. No .... the Nikkor was just as good as the Sigma, so there was no need
    to spend additional funds for a similar photographic result..
     
    Bernard Rother, Jan 11, 2008
    #29
  10. Helllllooooooo .... if you read his post again maybe you will understand
    that he actually *owns* a few Sigmas and they work the way he wants.
    I, unlike you who prefers to do optical bench tests, prefer to go
    outside and snap whatever catches my fancy and enjoy the fact I am able
    to see the sun and use my kit. Cor blimey mate .... get a life !
    Yeah ..sigh ....yada yada etc.
     
    Bernard Rother, Jan 11, 2008
    #30
  11. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest


    You're so easily fooled. It's one of the oldest tricks in the book,
    with only "bait and switch" being older.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #31
  12. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest



    You've been conned. But you don't care, so neither do I.

    I just hope that others here will learn from your foolishness.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #32
  13. No, Mr. Tony Polson, I have neither been conned nor am I foolish. I am
    more than satisfied with the price I have paid for the product I use
    with which to practice my hobby.

    So now I suggest you return to school and learn to be a bit more
    tolerant of other's requirements.
    I do not need to waste any further time on your outbursts.
     
    Bernard Rother, Jan 11, 2008
    #33
  14. Sosumi

    Tony Polson Guest


    I am not in the least concerned about you or the error of judgment you
    have made. It's your money. Do what you like with it.

    I am posting only to help other people who may be similarly conned
    into buying an inferior but high profit product by clever salesmen.
     
    Tony Polson, Jan 11, 2008
    #34
  15. Sosumi

    Guest Guest

    the nikkor is a substantially better lens in many ways.

    popular photography measured the stabilization at about 4 stops, among
    the highest of all the stabilized lenses they tested, whereas the sigma
    only gave about a two stop improvement. this matches what i saw when
    handling both lenses -- the difference in stablization was even visible
    in the viewfinder!

    photozone tested the sigma and the resolution was highly variable
    throughout the range, with 18mm and 200mm producing decent results, but
    at 35mm, the results were very poor. while the nikkor was not perfect,
    it was quite a bit better and consistent throughout the entire zoom
    range. you only examined a 4x6" print (and didn't say at what focal
    length or f/stop), but even a compact p&s digicam would probably
    produce a similar result.

    the sigma is f/6.3 at the long end, while the nikkor is f/5.6. that's
    not a huge difference, but f/6.3 is technically beyond the limit of the
    autofocus. nikon cameras can still focus at f/6.3, but the lens lies
    to the camera (canon will cut off past f/5.6). and it really *is*
    f/6.3 so the image in the viewfinder is darker than with the nikkor.

    the only advantage of the sigma (other than price) is that the lens
    doesn't creep when held vertically, however, i've heard that nikon has
    addressed this in recent units.

    the nikon lens is quite a bit better than the sigma, although it does
    cost a little more. it's not 'just as good' as the sigma, but rather
    'much better.'
     
    Guest, Jan 11, 2008
    #35
  16. Sosumi

    jean Guest

    On PBase, EXIF data is available, not all of it, but some. Post them even
    without EXIF and let me guess which is which ;-)

    Jean
     
    jean, Jan 11, 2008
    #36
  17. Sosumi

    Paul Allen Guest

    Perhaps you meant to say that PBase displays some of the EXIF data along
    with the image? Simply placing a JPEG on a web server does not change
    its embedded EXIF information. If PBase is stripping EXIF out of posted
    images, it's a poor service.

    Paul Allen
     
    Paul Allen, Jan 12, 2008
    #37
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.