I would not advise buying Sigma Lenses

[Lee Casler]

I just bought a Canon digital rebel only to find that 2 of my Sigma lenses do not work with it. They are the 18-35 and the 50mm macro lens. These lenses work with my A-2. Sigma does not upgrade these 2 lenses and offered me a credit which amounted to a $30 savings over New York prices. My lesson from this is, why take the chance of your lens being outdated when you have much more of a chance with the manufacturer's lens? A word to the wise is sufficient.


Lee Casler

[ahmadof]

i too have older sigma lenses that wil no longer work with my 10D. what kind of credit are they giving?

[Belmondo]

Hindsight is always 20/20, but your experience is probably a good object lesson for anyone who currently owns third-party EOS lenses: check compatibility before whipping out the credit card. It does raise a legitimate question about whether or not current Sigma lenses will have compatibility problems with future EOS bodies. From what I understand, Sigma has been pretty good about re-chipping those lenses for which such an operation is possible, and lord knows, there are some real Sigma advocates in this forum who are happy to sing their praises.

My own experience with Sigma lenses has been spotty. Shortly after I bought my 10D, I purchased a brand-new Sigma 17-35 which only worked intermittently; the AF would often hunt interminably, even in broad daylight. The second lens was a used item that I never actually purchased because it only delivered err-99 messages. Recently, however, I set all that aside and bought the 12-24, and so far I really love it. I’ve had no focusing issues, the clarity is first class, and it has a very solid feel to it.

I generally agree with your premise that compatibility is much more assured in the future by purchasing Canon EF lenses now, but where there exists no Canon equivalent, you can do much worse than Sigma.

[RichardtheSane]

Here is what I understand about sigma so far....

While other lens manufacturers such as Tamron and Tokina get the license from canon to use the mount, sigma don't. Sigma reverse engineer canon products to get the infomration to produce a lens that is compatible with canon bodies up untill the current ones.

As far as I am aware on the newer bodies the parameters for older lenses are stored within the camera, along with parameters for any lenses that use the canon mount under license.

Since sigma reverse engineer products then their lens parameters are not stored within the camera because they are not supported, hence why they don't work. I have seen an 8 year old tamron work on my 10D, and yet I had a sigma of similar age that would not stop down.

The above infomration is based on what I have expereinced, and what I have learned through research. If it is incirrect, and someone knows different I would be happy to hear it.

[scottbergerphoto]

Just like all Canon lenses aren't created equal, the same goes for Sigma, Nikon, etc. Many Canon consumer lenses are not as good as their L or some of their non L primes. Sigma will rechip older lenses when possible to work with the 10D. Many people on this forum swear by Sigma, particularly their EX series. I usually buy Canon, but when it came to buying a 500mm lens, I wasn't going to spend $7000 for a Canon 500mm f/4. I bought a Sigma 500mm EX APO HSM for 1/2 the price, and it's an excellent lens.
There are some examples of the Sigma 500mm f/4.5 here: http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/prospect_park_lake
If you do a search above on "Sigma Lenses", you can find the Sigma lenses that people like.
Regards,
Scott

[Ballen Photo]

Many people on this forum swear by Sigma, particularly their EX series.
If you do a search above on "Sigma Lenses", you can find the Sigma lenses that people like.
Regards,
Scott

I dont exactly swear by Sigma lenses, but at least I dont swear at them either. :shock: As Scott said; the Sigma EX series are usually pretty good. I have the Sigma 17-35 EX with HSM, and it does a really good job, but on the other hand my Sigma 135-400 is not nearly as sharp as I'd like it to be. :cry: I've since picked up a Canon 70-200 2.8 to fill that void, but kept the 135-400 to play with.
The moral here is YES, Canon is usually the BEST way to go, but if you're looking for a lens for a specific type of shooting and dont want to shell out Big Bucks some of the aftermarket lenses do a fine job.
Do the research on ANY lens you may be considering, and dont be afraid to walk into a camera store with your camera and try that lens, then go home, load the photos to your PC and check them out.
........Bruce

[scottbergerphoto]

You can also get unbiased test results on many lenses at www.photodo.com, under products. They also have a nice explanation of MTF tests. Another source is www.popphoto.com, in the reviews section.
Scott

[karusel]

And don't forget the www.photographyreview.com¸.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Here is what I understand about sigma so far....

While other lens manufacturers such as Tamron and Tokina get the license from canon to use the mount, sigma don't. Sigma reverse engineer canon products to get the infomration to produce a lens that is compatible with canon bodies up untill the current ones.

As far as I am aware on the newer bodies the parameters for older lenses are stored within the camera, along with parameters for any lenses that use the canon mount under license.

Since sigma reverse engineer products then their lens parameters are not stored within the camera because they are not supported, hence why they don't work. I have seen an 8 year old tamron work on my 10D, and yet I had a sigma of similar age that would not stop down.

The above infomration is based on what I have expereinced, and what I have learned through research. If it is incirrect, and someone knows different I would be happy to hear it.

Your basic premise about Sigma being the only one to reverse engineer from Canon is indeed flawed.

Canon does NOT license it's EOS mount technology to any third party manufacturer. This from Chuck Westfall.

In addition,. I do not think that there are any parameters for lenses stored in the bodies.

[Ballen Photo]

And don't forget the www.photographyreview.com¸.

Yes, This site is pretty good. Still, use your own judgement when choosing a new lens. They rated my Sigma 135-400 pretty high. :shock:
..........Bruce

[Belmondo]

In addition,. I do not think that there are any parameters for lenses stored in the bodies.

That didn't sound right to me either, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to dispute it. It seems that if true, it could create compatability issues with future EOS lenses. I would expect the bodies to be pretty dumb as regards the lens installed, at least beyond the aperture/focus communication and EXIF data.

[CoolToolGuy]

I continually hear complaints on this forum as well as 'on the street' about incompatibilities with Sigma lenses, but very rarely about Tamron or Tokina. Sometimes stories like this get blown out of proportion, and 'everybody' will pass the story on until it becomes a legend. Sigma's issues may be isolated, or with the older lenses, or whatever, but it is enough for me to stay away from them. That's a shame, because they seem to have the widest range of quality optics of the non-manufacturers. Whatever the issue is, I wish they would straighten it out and tell the Canon world it is straight. Until then, I vote with my wallet.

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[iwatkins]

Well, I've always been a big Sigma lens user and a happy one at that.

When a couple of older lenses didn't work on my 10D I called Sigma and they said they could rechip one but not the other.

I said fine, as I would expect. I just traded both lenses in against a new Sigma EX lens at my local camera shop and moved on.

I've always known of possible incompatabilities of 3rd party lenses (had a Tamron that didn't work either, but it was a very poor lens, so wasn't bothered). However, I do not let that stop me buying the right lens for the job (which includes being within my budget), and sometimes that'll be a Sigma.

So, I would say "I would advise anybody to buy Sigma lenses, especially the EX series, but take on board the fact that they are 3rd party lenses, and may well not work on new bodies in the future".

If you have a problem with that, don't buy them and save for the Canon equivelent (if there is one). It isn't that difficult.

But if you just say "I will not buy Sigma" then you are closing the door on some great lenses, that are not just optically great, but a lot cheaper than Canon versions.

In addition, Sigma make some lenses you just cannot buy versions of from Canon, e.g. Sigma 12-24 is a cracking good lens.

Cheers

Ian

[CyberDyneSystems]

A few lenses where Sigma is pioneering the type,. and as yet, no one has an equivelent:

Zooms;
300-800mm f/5.6 EX
120-300mm f/2.8 EX
100-300mm f/4 EX
50-500mm f/4.5-6.3 EX

Primes;
Currently Sigma is the last Manufacturer to still make an 800mm prime with the 800mm f/5.6.. and it is the Only 800mm Auto Focus lens ever made.

Sigma is also the last manufacturere to make a 500 f/4.5 which is much lighter and more portable than the Canon and Nikon 500mm f/4s

Sigma is the only manufacturere with a complete line of fast f/1.8 wide angle primes,. 20mm, 24mm, and 28mm.

As Ian points out,., the only option in a 12mm for Canon users is the Sigma 12-24mm EX

The only 3rd party Manufacturer to make an Image stabilized lens is Sigma with the 80-400mm OS EX

Just a few of the benifits that Sigma lenses offer,. all from memory.. if I were to go to there site and look at the lens list I am sure there would be many more lens options that are currently uniquely Sigma.

Tokina and Tamron may have been lucky to have never fallen prey to the incompatibility that Sigma did when Canon altered the communition from there bodies to the lenses....

...but as far as offering new and unique designs? There is not much there to cheer..

I guess we can thank Tamron for the dubious 28-200mm and 28-300mm designs.. :roll:

[Ballen Photo]

Well put Ian and CDS.
......Bruce

[Canuck]

I too have a story, but this is praise for Sigma where in the world of the 120-300mm F2.8EX there isn't anything like it anywhere so it makes for a difficult comparison. However I can say that it is a wildly sharp lens and PhotographyReview gives it a 5/5! There are 2 downsides to it, it is 5 3/4 lbs and costs about $1900. Ok, so what 300mm F2.8 lens isn't heavy? However, that said, I was doing a lot of research to find out ehat this lens was capable of doing. If you are gonna plunk $1900 for the lens alone, it would be a real blow if the lens ended up being not as highly touted as it supposedly was. I have had no plroblems with it and in fact I do believe I was the first to make it public that I had this lens. I was still not completely sure how to manipulate pics in Sept, 03 but like everone else, you learn and that seems to have taken me a lot further. I would like to thank Jim, RFMSports for the lessons he gave me on that! I have also sen the flip side, of crap lenses too. I need not mention more.

[PekkaM]

When I don't hate my 17-35 EX I'm quite happy with it. Just remember to never open it wider than 4 and it gives nice pictures, at 8 it's as sharp as I'll ever need.

When set smaller f than 4 and especially at 2.8 it has serious focusing issues if shooting anythin that isn't pretty close and well lit.

Still I'm really waiting for my Canon 50/f1.4 and 70-200/f4L, both ordered already... :D

[JZaun]

I won't critize all Sigma but I returned my Sigma 50mm 1:1 macro.. the auto focus hunted all the time when not in macro. The 50mm standard pics just lacked detail compared to my Canon 28-80mm when set at 50mm. Lastly the macro's were not to the quality I have seen here with other lens like the Sigma 105 and Canon 100 :D After I pay off my 100-400mm I plan to get a canon 100mm macro :D

(Ritz let me try it for 30 days) :D

JZ

[Tom W]

Well, I'm very happy with my Sigma 70-200 and the 1.4 teleconverter - a very good combination. Now, 10 years down the road, I may not get the compatibility with a newer camera, but on the other hand, none of my FD lenses is compatible with my Elan or my 10D.

[G3]

Well, I'm very happy with my Sigma 70-200 and the 1.4 teleconverter - a very good combination. Now, 10 years down the road, I may not get the compatibility with a newer camera, but on the other hand, none of my FD lenses is compatible with my Elan or my 10D.


You are right about that, Tom...but there's a huge flaw in that comparison. FD to EF is a platform change. The entire mount was changed by Canon. EOS EF to a later EOS EF is within the same platform and should be compatible.

With that said, I think that Sigma ran into a bigger problem with this incompatibility issue than they were prepared to handle. They have rechipped thousands of lenses and still have a backlog several months long of lenses waiting to be rechipped. I think it is taxing them to the limit both financially and man-power wise.

I am very pleased with the Sigma lenses that I own as far image quality and build quality is concerned. I think (or at least I hope) that Sigma learned some engineering lessons from this little debacle.

It also seems that Sigma is trying not to accept any more lenses for rechipping than they absolutely have to. The last several people that I've heard of with this issue were all told that their lenses were of a model/serial number that could not be rechipped. In the beginning, very few people were told that, it seems. My suspicion is that almost any of them can be reworked, it's more a matter of how much trouble is it and how much does it cost them to do the work. If they can get the customer to buy another lens or trade for a newer one (at a very slight discount) they are that much ahead of the game.

One of my Sigma lenses would not function on my 10D, so I called Sigma. The first thing I was told was that my lens could not be rechipped, but that they would offer me a trade-in deal (which amounted to a very minimal trade-in allowance for my lens). When I refused to accept that as an answer, I was finally put through to one of the managers (after several phone calls and emails). His response? "The person who told you your lens could not be rechipped was mistaken. Send it in and we'll rechip it for you." They now have the lens for rechipping. So, if someone is being told the lens they have can't be rechipped, it may pay to be a little more insistent.

I think that Sigma's intentions were good in the beginning. They recognized that they had a problem and they set up a plan to fix the issue for their customers. However, perhaps they did not anticipate the volume of rechipping requests they would get and were not prepared to handle it.

Overall, I am happy with Sigma quality and I am happy with the way they ultimately handled my problem. I will buy Sigma again, if they have a product that fits my needs.

[Tom W]

G3, I remember what you went through, and believe me, I'm not trying to lessen the PITA that you had to deal with. I'm just pointing out that something that is compatible with today's cameras cannot be guaranteed to work with tomorrows, platform change or not.

[G3]

G3, I remember what you went through, and believe me, I'm not trying to lessen the PITA that you had to deal with. I'm just pointing out that something that is compatible with today's cameras cannot be guaranteed to work with tomorrows, platform change or not.

Oh, yeah...that's the TRUTH. I learned that one the hard way! :) Even though you should be able to expect an EF lens to work on an EF camera, the ONLY way you can guarantee that is to buy nothing but Canon lenses.

And...even though it was a PITA, I would still risk it again to save the kind of money that I saved, and still get the image quality and focal length, since SIgma made it right in the end.

[Tom W]

G3, I remember what you went through, and believe me, I'm not trying to lessen the PITA that you had to deal with. I'm just pointing out that something that is compatible with today's cameras cannot be guaranteed to work with tomorrows, platform change or not.

Oh, yeah...that's the TRUTH. I learned that one the hard way! :) Even though you should be able to expect an EF lens to work on an EF camera, the ONLY way you can guarantee that is to buy nothing but Canon lenses.

And...even though it was a PITA, I would still risk it again to save the kind of money that I saved, and still get the image quality and focal length, since SIgma made it right in the end.

I'm with you on the will to take a risk - While I'm not going to fill my whole stable with Sigma glass, I am quite content with the two pieces I have. The cost savings I've enjoyed right there was enough to put the Canon 17-40 in my camera bag.