Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Oct 2012 (Friday) 21:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma lens question

 
Ltdave
it looks like im post #19,016
3,891 posts
Gallery: 24 photos
Likes: 3096
Joined Apr 2012
Location: the farthest point east in michigan
     
Oct 12, 2012 21:25 |  #1

okay. i am a COMPLETE and TOTAL Canon Snob...

ive never owned anything but Canon gear going all the way back to 1982 when i got my first AE-1 and 50mm f1.8, my F-1n and a handful of f2 primes...

ive seen images from the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and i am very impressed. it also has a great range with its speed...

why doesnt Canon have anything like this? id be certainly tempted to get one to replace the 70-200 f2.8L IS...

maybe its because theyd lose the sale of several lenses that fit in that range?

yep. im a Canon Snob...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
1Tanker
Goldmember
Avatar
4,470 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Swaying to the Symphony of Destruction
     
Oct 12, 2012 22:34 |  #2

Exactly! That would cannibalize sales from the 300/4, 300/2.8, 100-400, and possibly the 400/2.8. Sigma doesn't have much in the way of telephoto-primes, to lose sales from the 120-300. Well, they have the 300/2.8, and 500/4.5(that would compete), and the 300/2.8 is pretty-much the same price as the zoom.

Canon would have to, and would undoubtedly, charge $5000 or more for this, to make good business sense.


Kel
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenjiS
"Holy crap its long!"
Avatar
21,388 posts
Gallery: 572 photos
Likes: 2720
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Buffalo, NY
     
Oct 12, 2012 22:37 |  #3

If you like it, Buy it, Who cares who makes it, Care about the results.. Thats how I've been...

My two favorite lenses are my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and my Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS


Gear, New and Old! RAW Club Member
Wanted: 70-200. Time and good health
Deviantart (external link)
Flickr (This is where my good stuff is!) (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Pepe ­ Guitarra
Senior Member
Avatar
800 posts
Joined Jul 2012
Location: Southern California
     
Oct 13, 2012 02:21 as a reply to  @ KenjiS's post |  #4

Sigma 70-200/2.8-OS is wonderful, then my Sigma 100-300/4-Non-OS (but do not need it), and then my Sigma 120-400/4.5-4.5-OS in Pentax mount. Wonderful lenses with no problem at all.


It's not a photo until you print it! :cool:
Click here (external link), this is myflickr (external link) gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ZeroSkylineX
Member
Avatar
101 posts
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Oct 13, 2012 10:15 |  #5

At first I've only owned Canon lenses, now I'm all Sigma. Check my sig!

Gotta love how every Sigma lens comes with a case, hood and a much longer warranty compared to Canon.


Canon Rebel 600D/T3i | 580EX II
Sigma EX 10-20mm f/3.5| EX 17-50mm f/2.8 OS| EX 50mm f/1.4| EX 70-200mm f/2.8 II
---
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:03 as a reply to  @ ZeroSkylineX's post |  #6

This "cannibalize" idea is simply the most ill informed idea I have ever seen. What makes people think that by having more options for people that it would in someway hurt a company's sales numbers overall? Why do people think that money coming in from one product line is more valuable than the same amount of money coming in from a different product line? If people are going to try to make a guess, at least come up with something that makes sence. Like it would create too many die changes in the production line and lower overall amount of lenses made due to increased set up time. Or their marketing department isn't predicting enough sales to justify the development costs.

I have been working in manufacturing for a long time now and I have never heard the word "cannibalize" or the idea behind it in a staff meeting.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zerovision
Goldmember
Avatar
1,204 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Dallas/Ft Worth area
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:15 |  #7

FEChariot wrote in post #15117061 (external link)
This "cannibalize" idea is simply the most ill informed idea I have ever seen. What makes people think that by having more options for people that it would in someway hurt a company's sales numbers overall? Why do people think that money coming in from one product line is more valuable than the same amount of money coming in from a different product line? If people are going to try to make a guess, at least come up with something that makes sence. Like it would create too many die changes in the production line and lower overall amount of lenses made due to increased set up time. Or their marketing department isn't predicting enough sales to justify the development costs.

I have been working in manufacturing for a long time now and I have never heard the word "cannibalize" or the idea behind it in a staff meeting.

Because no one has come up with a better reason.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
zerovision
Goldmember
Avatar
1,204 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Dallas/Ft Worth area
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:17 |  #8

I would love to see that, but reality indicates, price wise, it would be around $8-10K since the new 100-400L with built in 1.4x converter is almost $6k. My buddy had the Sigma for his Nikon and got rid of it because it would not focus properly as was common with Nikons.

I have 1 Sigma lens 24-70 f/2.8 and it has worked well up until now. It recently stopped focusing and I believe it is due to dirt and dust getting into the lens. Now I will have to send it in to have it repaired.

What do you think the Canon version of the Sigma 200-500 f/2.8(35lbs $32,000) would look like and cost. 7 feet long 85lbs and $250,000.


  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
XxDJCyberLoverxX
Goldmember
Avatar
1,139 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 145
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:18 |  #9

ZeroSkylineX wrote in post #15116921 (external link)
At first I've only owned Canon lenses, now I'm all Sigma. Check my sig!

Gotta love how every Sigma lens comes with a case, hood and a much longer warranty compared to Canon.

I'm starting to become that way too!

My only lens now is the awesome Canon 70-200mm f/4L IS USM.

I might trade that for the Sigma OS version in the future. When the 35mm f/1.4 comes out, I might sell my Samyang for it (I love my Samyang though).

Even if I was to get a 24-70, I'd opt for Tamron's version over Canon's V1 brick.

Canon has awesome lenses too, but it comes at a hefty price: a price at which a hobbyist such as myself can't bear to spend on a lens.


Daniel
Sony a7 / Sony a7s / FE 24-70mm / FE 28mm F/2 / Samyang 135mm
Nebula 4000 Lite / Manfrotto 190cx
POTN Feedback / My Work! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,426 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 346
Joined Sep 2011
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:35 |  #10

zerovision wrote in post #15117098 (external link)
I would love to see that, but reality indicates, price wise, it would be around $8-10K since the new 100-400L with built in 1.4x converter is almost $6k.

Are you talking about the new 200-400/4 or a different lens. And have Canon released the price? The last price estimates for the 200-400 were closer to twice the price you are stating.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
328iGuy
Goldmember
Avatar
3,617 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 695
Joined Dec 2004
Location: Ottawa | Ontario
     
Oct 13, 2012 11:44 |  #11

ZeroSkylineX wrote in post #15116921 (external link)
Gotta love how every Sigma lens comes with a case, hood and a much longer warranty compared to Canon.

The the fact that the quality control is horrible and lens issues are a strong hit and miss. :(

thats why I have switched back to complete Canon lineup, including switching my beloved Sigma 85/1.4 to the Canon 85LII.


EOS R5 | EOS R6 | EF 8-15L | RF 15-35L 2.8 | RF 24-70L 2.8 | RF 85L 1.2 | RF 70-200L 2.8 | RF 100-500L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,380 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3278
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Oct 13, 2012 12:57 |  #12

zerovision wrote in post #15117098 (external link)
I would love to see that, but reality indicates, price wise, it would be around $8-10K since the new 100-400L with built in 1.4x converter is almost $6k.

so many people would be happy if that 200-400L came in at $6,000...it'll be nowhere near that though...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Vendee
Senior Member
Avatar
449 posts
Likes: 345
Joined May 2007
     
Oct 13, 2012 13:09 |  #13

328iGuy wrote in post #15117193 (external link)
The the fact that the quality control is horrible and lens issues are a strong hit and miss. :(

thats why I have switched back to complete Canon lineup, including switching my beloved Sigma 85/1.4 to the Canon 85LII.

I'm puzzled. I assume your "beloved" Sigma 85 was a good copy so why did you replace it with a Canon lens? If you had a good one then chances are it was going to stay good.


| EOS 6D| EOS 3 |EF 24-105mm f/4L|EF 70-200mm f/4L IS |EF 40mm f/2.8 STM | EF 50 f/1.8 II | Sigma 35mm f/1.4 Art | Speedlite 430EX II |Pentax MX |Pentax ME Super|Pentax K1000|Kiev 4A|Yashica Electra 35 GTN|Yashica 24
My stuff:- www.giverin.co.uk (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alazgr8
Member
Avatar
233 posts
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Orange County, CA.
     
Oct 13, 2012 15:13 as a reply to  @ Vendee's post |  #14

I have no doubt that the occasional lemon gets shipped out of the Canon warehouse, but can you really go wrong with a Canon lense? I don't mean to sound like a total fanboy, but I've been shooting Canon since the 80's and they have never let me down yet. -rick

Same here.

Ltdave wrote in post #15115337 (external link)
okay. i am a COMPLETE and TOTAL Canon Snob... ive never owned anything but Canon gear going all the way back to 1982 when i got my first AE-1 and 50mm f1.8, my F-1n and a handful of f2 primes... yep. im a Canon Snob...

I agree, but then I think that the other manufacturer's QC seems so hit or miss.

KenjiS wrote in post #15115588 (external link)
If you like it, Buy it, Who cares who makes it, Care about the results.. Thats how I've been... My two favorite lenses are my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 and my Canon 100mm f/2.8L IS

That's what holding me back from buying the Sigma 150-500.

328iGuy wrote in post #15117193 (external link)
The the fact that the quality control is horrible and lens issues are a strong hit and miss. :( thats why I have switched back to complete Canon lineup, including switching my beloved Sigma 85/1.4 to the Canon 85LII.


Rick S.
My Gear = Canon 50d ~ EF 100 f/2.8L IS USM Macro ~ EF 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM ~ EF-S 17-55 IS USM f/2.8 IS ~ EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM ~ EF 28-135 IS f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
StarBlazer
Member
83 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Sardinia, Italy
     
Oct 13, 2012 15:33 |  #15

Ltdave wrote in post #15115337 (external link)
okay. i am a COMPLETE and TOTAL Canon Snob...

id be certainly tempted to get one to replace the 70-200 f2.8L...

I don't think it is an alternative to your 70-200. The sigma weighs over 3kg and is shaped more like the 300 f2.8! Not something I carry with me everywhere. Also tough to handhold for long periods.

If you can afford to get it without selling the 70-200, that would be my recommendation.


EOS 7D | EOS 350d | EF-S 10-22mm | EF-S 18-135mm IS | EF 70-210 f/4 | Σ 120-300 f/2.8 OS | EF 50mm f/1.8 MKI | EF 100mm Macro f/2.8L IS | Σ 2x APO EX DG TC |
Celestron C9.25 | Vixen Sphinx SXD

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,578 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma lens question
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is john4938
666 guests, 273 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.