L is for LEMON..............

[ed rader]

after waiting longer than i thought i should i received my 70-200 f4L from B&H today, which is my first L lens.

after about 50 shots the AF quit working. my other lenses work fine but this LEMON is dead.

i shoulda bought local so i could get a replacement tomorrow but noooooooooo i wanted to save $40. now i am only saving $20 and i'll be out of a zoom for at least a week to 10 days.

this is my first L lens and the first problem i have ever had with any lens.

the pictures i did take were nice so optically the lens has met my expectations.

ed rader

[Rob612]

S**t happens, sometimes. Don't let this turn you down to L lenses. They are great. Every industrial production has its faults. They can be rare but they do happen. I feel for you.

[condyk]

The 70-200mm f4 L is a very, very fine lens. If you can afford a bit extra then the Sigma f2.8 version is a better all round option in my view if you don't mind the extra weight and size. Hard to tell if Canon standards are slipping or if complaining about quality is a 'flavour of the month thing'. But whatever, it's a very frustrating experience. Good luck with the replacement.

[ed rader]

The 70-200mm f4 L is a very, very fine lens. If you can afford a bit extra then the Sigma f2.8 version is a better all round option in my view if you don't mind the extra weight and size. Hard to tell if Canon standards are slipping or if complaining about quality is a 'flavour of the month thing'. But whatever, it's a very frustrating experience. Good luck with the replacement.

thanx. i actually chose the canon over the sigma because of the size and weight and because i could easily sell the canon should it not work out for me.

sure, i'd rather have the extra stop but i really do prefer a light kit. it wasn't an easy decision to make believe me.

ed rader

[Phil V]

The 70-200mm f4 L is a very, very fine lens. If you can afford a bit extra then the Sigma f2.8 version is a better all round option in my view if you don't mind the extra weight and size. Hard to tell if Canon standards are slipping or if complaining about quality is a 'flavour of the month thing'. But whatever, it's a very frustrating experience. Good luck with the replacement.

All the tests I've read of the Sigma suggest it's soft wide open (unusable for wedding portraits), which in my mind makes it a very large and heavy f4 lens. That's why I went for a second hand Canon 2.8 for similar money to the Sigma.

[blue_max]

I really don't want to suggest this but...

You haven't switched it to manual focus by accident have you - it's a very easy switch to knock when you put the lens away :lol:

It's worth just looking and sorry if it's the first thing you thought of.

Graham

[Bob_A]

The 70-200mm f4 L is a very, very fine lens. If you can afford a bit extra then the Sigma f2.8 version is a better all round option in my view if you don't mind the extra weight and size. Hard to tell if Canon standards are slipping or if complaining about quality is a 'flavour of the month thing'. But whatever, it's a very frustrating experience. Good luck with the replacement.

I just received my 70-200 f4L a few days ago and it's amazing. Incredible sharpness even with the Canon 1.4 extender. I know you love your Sigma which is certainly a good deal, but frankly I purchased the f4 because of the size and weight ... it's easy to pack and lighter than my 24-70 2.8L (also a fantastic lens ... I guess B&H is sending me the only good ones:lol: ).

[condyk]

All the tests I've read of the Sigma suggest it's soft wide open (unusable for wedding portraits), which in my mind makes it a very large and heavy f4 lens. That's why I went for a second hand Canon 2.8 for similar money to the Sigma.

An f2.8 Canon SH very good buy ... but I don't remember one serious review that said the Sigma lens was soft when I was weighing up whether to buy the Canon or Sigma. There were some comments like that from a few users on fredmiranda.com but most others rated it9 or 10 out of 10. Figure that out! It wasn't my experience either, in fact I sent a 'wide open' shot to the chap who bought mine as a sample and it was tack sharp and shot in doors. Can you point to those reviews, as I'm sure potential buyers would find it useful.

I bought the Canon F4 first on strong advice here and the advice was misplaced for what I wanted it for. The lower light usability is not that hot, tho' I REALLY liked its many other fine qualities, and it's awesome value. I would certainly buy it again if I needed that range.

[Bob_A]

Check out the lens ratings at www.photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/) . Based on my experience with trying different lenses on both my Elan and 20D this site seems to have managed to rank things fairly well (and I've had lens models that were horrible and some that are excellent).

The ratings are based on user input, but there are some statistical tests applied to filter out anyone trying to skew the results. They don't give a lot of details about this, but somehow they have the recipe about right. The results are probably more accurate when there were a larger numbr of reviewers ... so if you don't agree with the review and there were only 10 or so that submitted data I wouldn't sweat it.

[condyk]

Check out the lens ratings at www.photozone.de (http://www.photozone.de/). Based on my experience with trying different lenses on both my Elan and 20D this site seems to have managed to rank things fairly well (and I've had lens models that were horrible and some that are excellent).

Bob ... I'm slightly confused! Are you saying this site shows reviews of the Sigma scoring poorly wide open as Phil V says (it doesn't show that!) or are you posting this as a useful site generally? I think the latter, and you're right. Combined with fredmiranda.com these are the best two sites for gaining insight into real world user experiences because they are collated from many scorings. I just wish the photozone reviews were easier to read. Easy to make a mistake:

For info, at photozone we see:

Sigma f2.8 scores 4.15/5 from 107 reviewers
Canon IS scores 4.55/5 from 40 reviewers
Canon f2.8 scores 4.69/5 from 148 reviewers
Canon f4 scores 4.59/5 from 124 reviewers

Which is reflected in all lenses also scoring high at fredmiranda. Clearly, all are excellent and I'm sure anyone will be happy with their choice, however they make it. In the US maybe the choice is easy; in Europe the prices make it a little more difficult!

[kenyc]

I really don't want to suggest this but...

You haven't switched it to manual focus by accident have you - it's a very easy switch to knock when you put the lens away :lol:

It's worth just looking and sorry if it's the first thing you thought of.

Graham

Yeah, really easy. I do it quite often...

KAC

[ed rader]

>>>I really don't want to suggest this but...

You haven't switched it to manual focus by accident have you - it's a very easy switch to knock when you put the lens away :lol:

It's worth just looking and sorry if it's the first thing you thought of.

Graham<<<


LOL :lol: !

i tried everything eveything i could think of at least 20 times.

she's dead jim :cry: .

i'll buy a new lens today. maybe locally unless B&H bends over backwards to get me one early next week and eats all shipping charges.

thanx,

ed rader

[Bob_A]

Bob ... I'm slightly confused! Are you saying this site shows reviews of the Sigma scoring poorly wide open as Phil V says (it doesn't show that!) or are you posting this as a useful site generally? I think the latter, and you're right.

Useful generally. I have had several lenses on my two Canon cameras (from poor to excellent quality), and tried others, and find that the rankings at photozone are surprisingly accurate. I've even owned the Canon 28-90 briefly (came with an Elan II kit) and it certainly deserves to be the worst lens on the standard zoom list with an optical rating of 0.69. Just look at the MTF's for this lens, and you can see why it is as bad as this ... it should be. I have a 28-105 II USM which is WAY better than the 28-90, but for me it is still just an "ok" lens, and that is how it is ranked on photozone ("sub-average"). Again, the MTF's for this lens tell the story ... it's ranked right where it should be. The 28-105 is a pretty sharp lens stopped down to f8, but too soft for me wide open.

I actually made a post in the wee hours last night giving the same rankings you just posted, but got a server busy error and lost my work ... so I didn't bother re-writitng it.

So, from the photozone site the Sigma, Canon L's and the Tamron 70-210 are all way up on the list optically, and I would bet they all deserve to be there :D

[blue_max]

LOL :lol: !

i tried everything eveything i could think of at least 20 times.

she's dead jim :cry: .

i'll buy a new lens today. maybe locally unless B&H bends over backwards to get me one early next week and eats all shipping charges.

thanx,

ed rader[/QUOTE]

I do think it might come across as sucking eggs sometimes, but you never know and I am sure you would be pleased if it actually was as simple as that!

One never knows who one is dealing with... veteran or novice, pro or ameteur.

Hope you get a good one. They are really rather good.

Graham

[ed rader]

Graham -- i know what you meant and that's why i laughed :lol: .

i know this is a good lens and i know my problem is uncommon. i'll call B&H tomorrow and if they give me the go-ahead i'll try the eraser trick on the contacts.

if not i'll return the lens, probably for a refund unless they allow me to buy another while this one is returned and overnight it on their dime....i sure as hell ain't waiting five days for delivery like last time.

i know stuph happens but as a small business owner for 11 years i know when something goes wrong the good guys will make it right even at the expense of profit.

thanks for the support,

ed rader

[blinking8s]

i read an article once that like 14% of all electronic products are quirky in some way or another...sine even the good stuff goes through the cheapest means of production

guess some slip through and make it to stores

[lostdoggy]

Buy local pay sales Tax???

[ed rader]

the difference between shipping and sales tax was about $25.

now to return the lens priority insured i figure it will cost me about $15 more.

i now figure that i have "saved" about 20 or 25 bucks by buying from B&H but i also have no zoom lense and if i exchange the lens via the mails i'll probably be zoomless for 7-10 more days.

believe me with over 300 ebay transactions plus well over 400 verified pay pal transactions i am no stranger to dealing on the internet and i will continue to deal on the net whenever it is to my advantage.

in this case however, i should have bought local and i almost did but noooooooo i wanted to save 40 bucks :cool: .

ed rader

[summerwind4]

Buy local pay sales Tax???

it pays in the long run for several reasons......
1 no waiting for the product
2 you can sample what you want
3 exchanges are a lot easier
4 good faith with the local guy and he'll take care of shipping your stuff off when it needs it while under warranty.

i'm glad that i support my local shop for at least the bigg items...they always give me the same prices i see at B&H, and today was a another reason for me to support the local shop...............i bought the 70-200 f/4 from them yesterday and got home and soon found out that i had a Dud of a lens............(focusing was way off) went in this morning when they opened, came home with another copy of the lens, and this one is perfect.
no bummed weekend
in the long run, i am happy and not agonizing over not being able to shoot what i bought the lens for in the first place.