Sigma Lenses.. any good?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Trey, Nov 1, 2004.

  1. Trey

    Trey Guest

    I am looking to get the Canon D20 and a 70-300mm zoom lens. If I save my
    food stamps I can get the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM lens for
    about $1200.

    when I was looking at prices, online, just under the Canon lens, I saw
    "sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 DL Macro Super Lens for Canon-AF Camera" $130.

    WTF? I understand the idea of "you get what you pay for" but why are the
    sigma lenses so much less?? are they any good?

    Are there other, better alternatives to the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO
    IS USM ?
     
    Trey, Nov 1, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Because they make cheap, crappy stuff and market it to unsuspecting
    amateurs who are too cheap to buy OEM.
    Almost anything is better than Sigma. In the long run, you'll be
    better off to stick with Canon lenses.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Nov 1, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Trey

    Trey Guest

    my suspision was correct then.
    Thats what I was afraid of. but I know it will be well worh it in the long
    run.. and its not like a lens goes bad, take care of it, and it will be good
    for many years to come, Im sure.
     
    Trey, Nov 1, 2004
    #3
  4. Trey

    Chips Guest

    Trey,

    Don't just take Mr. Aintworth's answer. He is very opinionated on this
    subject, with very little agreement on this NG.

    Many people have posted great satisfaction with sigma lenses.

    Try to get more objective opinions perhaps.

    GC
     
    Chips, Nov 1, 2004
    #4
  5. Trey

    Obake Guest

    bit unfair comparing those two lenses. might be a bit more even if you
    compare the sigma 70-300 with the canon ef 90-300 f4.5 :)

    if you can afford the ef 70-300 DO IS i'd suggest you go with that
     
    Obake, Nov 1, 2004
    #5
  6. Trey

    Carl Guest

    A newsgroup is not a good place to ask this sort of question as you are
    unlikely to get a considered opinion based upon proper test. Its far
    better to check out proper equipment tests and reviews in magazines or
    on the Internet.

    Personally, I've been using Sigma and Nikon lenses for years. Each have
    their own pro's and cons. But one thing you can always be sure of is
    that you'll pay much more for Nikon or Canon lenses. I've always found
    the glass in Sigma lenses to be good - more recently anyway. Once upon a
    time... One thing I have noticed is that the autofocus motors are not
    always as fast as on the Nikon's. Anyway don't listen to me either. If
    you have a local store get them to let you try the lenses out.

    www.shutterbug.com/test_reports/0199sb_sigma/
     
    Carl, Nov 1, 2004
    #6
  7. Trey

    n.t. Guest

    Some sigma lenses are ok, but most are significantly inferior to Canon or
    Nikkor glass. And its not just the optical performance im talking about
    here, but the general feel of the lenses (zoom smoothness, focus slack,
    build quality etc..) is also an important factor for most photographers who
    have used several different lenses. If you have used good quality canon
    lenses then there is no going back to what can only be described as
    'no-name' lenses.
    But then again, if you have only ever used cheap lenses, then you will never
    notice the difference.
     
    n.t., Nov 1, 2004
    #7
  8. Trey

    Digi-Reb Guest

    I would consider the non DO Canon model. The Difractive Optics feature only
    acts to make the lens shorter and lighter at an added cost of $800 over the
    non DO model. Both have image stabilization.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=NavBar&A=getItemDetail&Q=&
    sku=319783&is=USA&si=feat#goto_itemInfo
    vs.
    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&s
    ku=102854&is=USA

    If you really want to drop that much money consider one of Canon's "L"
    lenses.

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=productlist&A=details&Q=&s
    ku=91680&is=USA
     
    Digi-Reb, Nov 1, 2004
    #8
  9. Trey

    Petros Guest

    Trey posted:
    I have this lens (came with my sd9). I won't say that it's super sharp,
    and there are color aberrations in some shots near the edges, but... I
    really couldn't afford a better set when I got my camera (although I
    did spend a few extra bucks to upgrade the second lens that came with
    it.) and for me it's a good starter setup. When I get the chance, I'll
    spend more for a better lens, for now, though, I can make it work for
    me. I have gotten some nice shots in macro mode and I've done some
    decent portraits with it.
     
    Petros, Nov 1, 2004
    #9
  10. Yeah, I've only been doing photography for for 38 years. Go buy your
    Sigma junk. What do I care? Just trying to save you some heartache
    down the road.
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Nov 1, 2004
    #10
  11. Trey

    Fitpix Guest

    Trey,
    I own Canon, Tokina and Sigma lenses. My 28-80 Sigma I found a lacking in
    the wide angle department but is great for digital IR pix (no hot spot!). My
    Sigma 70-200 f2.8 is a great lens and I get great results from it, I also
    got it for $600 with the 1.4x . It is sharp and does well with both
    portraiture and sports. If you were to consider Sigmas I would stick with
    the upper end lenses, I once owned a 70-300 non APO version and found it
    less than tack sharp (I also owned the equivalent Canon and found it even
    less sharp!). I use a Tokina 19-35 and really like it. Bottomline: you can
    get great images from Sigma, Tokina and Tamron, I have been shooting
    professionally for 12 years and have had tons of pix in the bodybuilding
    magazines from both Sigma and Canon. Randall has an affliction that keeps
    him from understanding that Sigma does have some nice lenses, of course this
    will be totally due to the fact that he has superior tastes and noone can
    match his ability to see or berate the casual photographer.

    http://www.pbase.com/fitpix has some sports shots I shot w the Sigma 70-200
    f2.8

    David Fields
    owner www.delawarestudio.com
     
    Fitpix, Nov 1, 2004
    #11
  12. Trey

    Fitpix Guest

    The day you try to save people heartache in this group is the day pigs fly.
    Your belittling tone and smugness behind "38 years" has little value to
    those who see you week after week attacking people who come here for advice.
     
    Fitpix, Nov 1, 2004
    #12
  13. Trey

    Mike Kohary Guest

    There is no such thing as a good 70-300mm lens for $130. Randall is correct
    in this particular case.
     
    Mike Kohary, Nov 1, 2004
    #13
  14. Trey

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Who is being belittling in this thread? Not Randall - he just gave an
    opinion on Sigma lenses, and promptly received an insulting reply (see
    above). Anyone who disagrees is free to post their own opinion, but it's no
    excuse to tear someone else down - the very thing some of you have had
    problems with Randall doing in the past.

    I understand there's a bit of personal antagonistic history here. But if
    some of you guys have to resort to belittling someone merely for stating an
    opinion, you might want to ask yourself what part you play in that history.
    I suggest you focus more on what is being said, rather than who is saying
    it.
     
    Mike Kohary, Nov 1, 2004
    #14
  15. Trey

    Trey Guest

    I believe it was actually $450, marked down to $130, (guess it was the 2004
    model) but I have never seen a 60+% mark down on a Canon Lens.

    Do you actually think I can find the same page with the pices again? nope.
    here is the closest I could find.
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...104-4339743-4814305?v=glance&s=photo&n=507846
     
    Trey, Nov 1, 2004
    #15
  16. Trey

    Fitpix Guest

    point taken Mike
     
    Fitpix, Nov 1, 2004
    #16
  17. Trey

    brian Guest

    Mike, unless you have seen any of Randall's replies to ANY post on this and
    other NG's, then I suggest that you refrain from joining the Randall
    Aintworth Appreciation Society.
    Randall is consistently insulting and a hell of a lot less than helpful to
    anyone who appears to know less than him on the subject of Photography, of
    course having seen his work, I should point out that, this is a small group
    of people.
    He is actually well know as a NG troll.

    Brian............................
     
    brian, Nov 1, 2004
    #17
  18. Trey

    Mike Kohary Guest

    Fitpix: thanks. :)

    Brian, I've seen many of his postings, and I agree that he has been less
    than kind on many occasions. But I strongly disagree that he is a troll -
    quite the contrary, Randall has lately been making a pretty clear effort to
    get along better and refrain from the insults. And in this particular
    thread, he did absolutely nothing wrong - it was another poster who threw
    the first insult his way.

    These arguments are a two-way street. I think that if Randall has listened
    to feedback and is making the effort to be kinder and gentler, it seems only
    fair that you forgive him past indiscretions and give him another chance.
    Otherwise, you can't really say you're any better.
     
    Mike Kohary, Nov 1, 2004
    #18
  19. Trey

    Trey Guest


    wow, I would like that L series lens, but its a bit too big to take on a 60
    miles backpacking trip or a mountain bike trip.
     
    Trey, Nov 1, 2004
    #19
  20. Trey

    brian Guest

    I do have to agree with you on a few of his more recent posts, he does
    appear to be making an effort, judging from the last post or two, but I am
    sure it will take a lot more effort on his part to be accepted by all on
    these NG's, after all, a lot of them have been on the receiving end of
    Randall's darker side.
    He must be prepared to take some flak, until his change is accepted as his
    true intention.

    Brian...........................
     
    brian, Nov 1, 2004
    #20
    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.