Is the 3rd party QC lottery fact or fiction?

I've owned the Tamron 28-75, Tokina 12-24, 2 Sigma 30s, Sigma 70-200 and Sigma 150-500. I've never had any focus or other operational problems with any of them.

I sold my first Sigma 30 with the intent of buying the 35L, but got a case of seller's remorse and bought another copy (now for sale since I recently purchased a used 35L).

I sold the Tamron because I bought the 24-70L on an impulse.

I plan to sell the Tokina because I have the 16-35.

I plan to sell the 70-200 to get one with image stabilization.

I didn't vote in your poll because I don't know the answer. I can only speak about my experiences with Sigma and other non-Canon lenses.

These pictures came from a Sigma 150-500mm optical stabilizer lens.

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

IMAGE IS A REDIRECT OR MISSING! Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Totally depends on the lens.

But definitely fiction, until you're the one with the 30, 50 or 85 with focus issues.

I have no problems with purchasing Sigma......
I'd like Sigma to come out with a 400 f5.6 OS.....
I'll probably end up with a 150-500 mm

StarTzar wrote in post #15453567
I have no problems with purchasing Sigma......
I'd like Sigma to come out with a 400 f5.6 OS.....
I'll probably end up with a 150-500 mm

you could do that but then you might think, coulda woulda had a 100-400

XSi (450D)
Canon 100-400
f5.6
100mm

watt100 wrote in post #15453591
you could do that but then you might think, coulda woulda had a 100-400

XSi (450D)
Canon 100-400
f5.6
100mm

Actually, I did own a 100-400 at one time.
Purchased used from Adorama.
Did not really care for the pump action.

I also owned a 300 F4L IS with a 1X4
The AF failed on the 300 and canon charged me 400$ for repairs.
Nonetheless, I really did like the IS on the 300 (I'm a shaker)

I really would like a 400MM 5.6 IS or OS (at a reasonable price)

BrandonSi wrote in post #15451876
Agreed.. Specific lens models exhibit issues more consistently than others (Sigmalux perhaps being the most infamous). I think overall Sigma gets a bad rap across the board, but there do seem to be more posts about QC issues when compared to Canon. Given that the forum is just a tiny percentage of owners, take it with a grain of salt.

I would, however, take the 100-400L hands down, every time. I took it with me to Africa and could not imagine ever doing a similar trip again without it. It's old, ugly and heavy, but amazingly good at what it does.

true. ask roger at lensrentals.

alazgr8 wrote in post #15450726
The biggest thing keeping me from buying a Sigma is the supposed quality control lottery of Sigma products. I know that many of you own or have owned perfect and trouble free Sigma lenses, but why all the stories? Is it a case of the squeaky wheel getting all the attention? I would really like the Sigma 50-500, because of it's versatility, greater range, and comparable price with the Canon. The Sigma 150-500 is attractive because of the price and range. The Canon, because it's a a Canon, and if the price isn't a problem, you can't go wrong...

I want to buy new because the prices I have been seeing on used lenses are not that far off of new prices, and also I won't have to worry about inheriting someone elses problems.

I will be shooting various youth outdoor sports including soccer, and baseball, vintage motocross, and trips to the zoo.


The three lenses I am interested in are (in order of preference):

1. Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS USM $1499 @ B&H, Adorama & Amazon.
2. Sigma 50-500 f/5-6.6 OS HSM etc. $1509 @ B&H, Adorama & Amazon.
3. Sigma 150-500 f/4.5-6.3 OS HSM etc. $1069 @ B&H, Adorama & Amazon.

I think it is more on certain lens designs are more sensitive and thus have more variation. Some Canon lenses seem as prone as any other maker's.

I think sigma, at least in less than their most recent lenses, tended to have worse AF motors and algorithms though and Tamron used to have pretty slow AF motors (even their new ones are still no match for top Canon USM speed).

I think some of those sigmas you list above don't the greatest reputation for sharpness or AF and all above are quite slow. One of those two, I forget which, I read some pretty bad things about, very poor contrast and mediocre AF.

For youth sports and soccer and such a 300 f/4 might be good. Add a 1.4x TC for wildlife/outfield shots in baseball. If you forgot about IS for zoo, you could even get a used 300 f/4 non-IS for like $625-725, that plus the money saved to an upcoming 7D2. That body might do well (if the rumors are true and it will exist and it will have 5D3-type AF which is a lot better for field sports than the 40D AF).

Sigma has resolved their QC control issues that plagued them in the past.
Every sigma lens I've owned has turned out to be wonderful.

My Sigma 30mm was about half a foot off front focusing when I received it.

That being said, I sent it in with my camera for calibration, and freaking loved it the rest of the time I owned it.

I have a retired professional photographer friend that raves about his Sigma 50-500 on his Nikon D800. He goes to the L.A. Zoo a couple of times a week, and the 50-500 length lets him shoot a wide variety of animals, but he admits the lens isn't sharp thoughout the whole range. As for me, I have a preference for canon lenses. While cost isn't a major factor, and all things equal, like most people I like to save a buck. In this case the 100-400 and 50-500 are virtually the same price. I will go with the Canon 100-400, due in large part to the peace of mind the Canon name provides. Thanks for the advice and input. -rick

alazgr8 wrote in post #15455185
I have a retired professional photographer friend that raves about his Sigma 50-500 on his Nikon D800.

Using a mediocre tele on a 36MP D800 that demands the absolute best glass?

That sure is smart.

Don't be so quick to judge. Take a look at Charlie's work, here's his website. For what it's worth, Ansel Adams shot some great images with a Polaroid. -rick

http://www.charliemore​y.com/

kin2son wrote in post #15455218
Using a mediocre tele on a 36MP D800 that demands the absolute best glass? That sure is smart.

I have personally used the Sig50 1.4, good versions owned by my friend. Over 3 retailers, over 4 months, I tried 7 without getting a good one.

It's not just third party.

Canon's 50mm f/1.4 also comes out very random. And many break later, which at least the equivalent Sigma does not.