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 22 Feb 2013 (Friday) 04:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

My take on Sigma

 
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,425 posts
Likes: 2386
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Feb 28, 2013 13:39 |  #106

kfreels wrote in post #15661778 (external link)
But it's not that they have to. It's that as a retailer, it is a way that they found to capture paranoid would-be Sigma buyers. .../edited/.... I just don't see what this is such a big deal.

I believe as Helen explained it was that they set up the program because they were worried that their handling was causing the higher return rate. This would pretty much say that it's not paranoid would-be lens purchasers, but real issues.

https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=15470871&p​ostcount=1

But your right, in the grand scheme of things, this is not that big of an issue. As mentioned, if you do get a bad lens, there are options to make things right as there are with the other manufacturers. But to simply state that there is not an issue or to post that you have a perfect lens thus all others have perfect lenses as well and any issue they encounter must be because they are paranoid is not right either.

Clearly Sigma makes some really nice lenses and they service a niche that others do not but just as clearly Sigma has also historically had quality issues significant enough so that retailers had to put programs into place to deal with the issue. So far they are the only ones I am aware of that have had such treatment.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
kfreels
Goldmember
Avatar
4,297 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Princeton, IN
     
Feb 28, 2013 14:27 |  #107

gjl711 wrote in post #15661812 (external link)
I believe as Helen explained it was that they set up the program because they were worried that their handling was causing the higher return rate. This would pretty much say that it's not paranoid would-be lens purchasers, but real issues.

https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=15470871&p​ostcount=1

But your right, in the grand scheme of things, this is not that big of an issue. As mentioned, if you do get a bad lens, there are options to make things right as there are with the other manufacturers. But to simply state that there is not an issue or to post that you have a perfect lens thus all others have perfect lenses as well and any issue they encounter must be because they are paranoid is not right either.

Clearly Sigma makes some really nice lenses and they service a niche that others do not but just as clearly Sigma has also historically had quality issues significant enough so that retailers had to put programs into place to deal with the issue. So far they are the only ones I am aware of that have had such treatment.

Well, I never said all others have perfect lenses. In fact, I said I got a bad one once as well. All I'm trying to do is get this into the proper perspective. It makes no sense that some people would choose not to buy a Sigma lens who would otherwise be very happy Sigma customers just because an overblown idea that somehow they might get stuck with a lemon. So instead they either spend twice as much and bypass having other variety in their lenses, or they don't buy anything at all because they can't afford a Canon version.


I am serious....and don't call me Shirley.
Canon 7D and a bunch of other stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Dooku
Member
97 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Feb 28, 2013 16:03 as a reply to  @ kfreels's post |  #108

I have read almost the complete thread and the arguments presented regarding the "failure rate" for Sigma lenses are......well,...uhmm plain ridiculous.
If anything is now clear from these posts is that nobody has a working knowlegde of statistical mathematics. And presenting anecdotal info from around the internet is just irrelevant and serves no purpose other then obvious psychological unrest for some(alot!) people.

I must agree with Kfreels as the aruments presented are the most sensible, please use common sense instead of letting your gut dictating your brain.

Also, Adorama providing this socalled "service" is just silly and has nothing to do with concern for their customers. Anyone working in a large commercial company or running their own business should know that already. Adorama do this ONLY because they think it's obviously worth it for their bottom line. If they knew the Sigma lenses with utter crap they would drop them immediately. But the product is in their eyes worth it to go that extra mile so they can sell more lenses(they know are good anyway) to a group of "paranoid" customers who cant make up their minds.
Believe you me when I say that Adorama would NEVER EVER even contemplate this "service" if they did not get an obvious return from it.

People get so emotional about products that for some reason all common sense goes out the window? If you can get over the fanboyism and brand-logo-fetishism, then it's just another tool you use for your hobby.....that is all it is. Apple actually have an absolute horrible product reliablilty issue with most of their products, but for some reason their followers.....eeeehh I mean customers seem to forgive them and absolve them from any wrong doing :-) If you are interested in why this is, then just read some researches that were done on this subject comparing Apple customers to a religious sect......but I digress.

Accusing Sigma of any deficiencies that just might appear in a small percentage when buying their products is only valid if Canon's are 100% perfect.....which they are defintely not. Arguing about the difference in failure rate of which both are acceptable, is just academic hogwash.

P.S. Please excuse the directnes of this post. I am not native Dutch, but seem to have picked up this trait :-)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
guitarjeff
Senior Member
671 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2012
     
Feb 28, 2013 16:41 |  #109

When observing hundreds of comparison photos the overall tint difference is clear. I have found this in my photos as well as the sample threads..

I was deciding between the 30 and ef 28 1.8, and I had both sample threads open for a couple days looking back and forth, and the difference was easy to see overall.

Charlie wrote in post #15661677 (external link)
when you put the photos side by side, it's much more subtle than what you describe.

I can put photos with similar shooting conditions side by side, and you'd have a hell of a time telling if I shot canon, tamron, or sigma. I can probably dig up shots of the EF40, EF 50 1.2, and Tam 24-70, all shot at 2.8 and it would be damn hard to differentiate the tonality of the skin, especially under the same lighting conditions.

reference
https://photography-on-the.net …hp?p=7705154&po​stcount=11




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Feb 28, 2013 16:56 |  #110

guitarjeff wrote in post #15662404 (external link)
When observing hundreds of comparison photos the overall tint difference is clear. I have found this in my photos as well as the sample threads..

I was deciding between the 30 and ef 28 1.8, and I had both sample threads open for a couple days looking back and forth, and the difference was easy to see overall.

I've never noticed this myself. I may have to pay more attention to see if I can actually observe it.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aquaforester
Senior Member
886 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 328
Joined Nov 2011
     
Feb 28, 2013 17:05 |  #111

Dooku wrote in post #15662279 (external link)
I have read almost the complete thread and the arguments presented regarding the "failure rate" for Sigma lenses are......well,...uhmm plain ridiculous.
If anything is now clear from these posts is that nobody has a working knowlegde of statistical mathematics. And presenting anecdotal info from around the internet is just irrelevant and serves no purpose other then obvious psychological unrest for some(alot!) people.

I must agree with Kfreels as the aruments presented are the most sensible, please use common sense instead of letting your gut dictating your brain.

Also, Adorama providing this socalled "service" is just silly and has nothing to do with concern for their customers. Anyone working in a large commercial company or running their own business should know that already. Adorama do this ONLY because they think it's obviously worth it for their bottom line. If they knew the Sigma lenses with utter crap they would drop them immediately. But the product is in their eyes worth it to go that extra mile so they can sell more lenses(they know are good anyway) to a group of "paranoid" customers who cant make up their minds.
Believe you me when I say that Adorama would NEVER EVER even contemplate this "service" if they did not get an obvious return from it.

People get so emotional about products that for some reason all common sense goes out the window? If you can get over the fanboyism and brand-logo-fetishism, then it's just another tool you use for your hobby.....that is all it is. Apple actually have an absolute horrible product reliablilty issue with most of their products, but for some reason their followers.....eeeehh I mean customers seem to forgive them and absolve them from any wrong doing :-) If you are interested in why this is, then just read some researches that were done on this subject comparing Apple customers to a religious sect......but I digress.

Accusing Sigma of any deficiencies that just might appear in a small percentage when buying their products is only valid if Canon's are 100% perfect.....which they are defintely not. Arguing about the difference in failure rate of which both are acceptable, is just academic hogwash.

P.S. Please excuse the directnes of this post. I am not native Dutch, but seem to have picked up this trait :-)

So basically what your saying is the illusion has become reality. There is no basis for Adorama to commence this program and they are using peoples paranoia to turn a profit. Tell me where is the quantitative proof of what you are saying.

In addition your comment about Apple where is your proof as well. If you read the whole thread than you would have seen this:

http://www.pcworld.com …iphone_tops_the​_list.html (external link)

It's from 63,000 PC World readers. That's a pretty sound sample.


Flickr (external link)

Current Gear
Canon 60D, 10-18, 24 Pancake, 60 macro, 70-200 F4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DarklingSmilie
Member
Avatar
163 posts
Joined Aug 2007
     
Feb 28, 2013 17:11 |  #112

I've owned many sigma lenses now, from fairly basic 70-300, 24-70 2.8, bigma etc and never had a problem yet, either with a used or new lens that I've bought. Only issue I have had was when looking for a 12-24 DG lens over the last few months I couldn't find a good one. Bought 2 off eBay and they both had similar issues with one side being softer than the other and tried 2 locally, one was soft on the left side and the other had back focusing issues. Obviously with used gear there could be issues with care by previous owners, for the minute I've settled on a Canon 17-40L.


My Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
HelenOster
That's me!
Avatar
4,500 posts
Likes: 568
Joined Jul 2008
Location: New York
     
Feb 28, 2013 17:46 |  #113

aquaforester wrote in post #15661711 (external link)
Now Adorama just needs a fun name for the Sigma lenses they are pre-testing :)

Hmmmm... the guy who tests them is Adam - was trying to think of something witty by taking away the letters in his name from the name Adorama. But it's been too long a day and my brain hurts!



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
13,980 posts
Gallery: 149 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 4094
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Feb 28, 2013 21:47 |  #114

Concerning Sigma's color cast:

guitarjeff wrote in post #15661182 (external link)
I would just love to know the source of the coloring because it's like you can't remove its effects in PP, like the tint comes before the ability of software to get rid of it. When yu try to change it in PP, like trying to alter a red or green, it's like the red or green changes WITHIN the brownish tint, the brown tint seems to be immune to PP altering.

That is an awesome description of the problem, Jeff!

I bought a 150-500 a few years ago. It focused ok, and was fairly sharp, but had a very, very slight color cast that I just didn't like. And, as you detail so well, I couldn't seem to correct it when post processing. It was very slight indeed - no one else could really notice it. But I could, and it was bothersome. So, I returned the lens and decided to stick with my 100-400 (Canon).

It's just interesting to me that someone else had the exact same issue. I knew something wasn't exactly right with the color cast, but was never able to describe the problem in an accurate way - which you did with exactitude!


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,152 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9714
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Feb 28, 2013 21:53 |  #115

guitarjeff wrote in post #15662404 (external link)
When observing hundreds of comparison photos the overall tint difference is clear. I have found this in my photos as well as the sample threads..

I was deciding between the 30 and ef 28 1.8, and I had both sample threads open for a couple days looking back and forth, and the difference was easy to see overall.

I've owned a couple of Tamron lenses, and found them to be noticeably warmer than the Canon. You really start to realize it after you've edited many pictures between the two lenses.

I don't necessarily think its bad.....just different.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mystik610
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
9,152 posts
Gallery: 36 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 9714
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Houston, TX
     
Feb 28, 2013 22:04 |  #116

Dooku wrote in post #15662279 (external link)
I have read almost the complete thread and the arguments presented regarding the "failure rate" for Sigma lenses are......well,...uhmm plain ridiculous.
If anything is now clear from these posts is that nobody has a working knowlegde of statistical mathematics. And presenting anecdotal info from around the internet is just irrelevant and serves no purpose other then obvious psychological unrest for some(alot!) people.

I must agree with Kfreels as the aruments presented are the most sensible, please use common sense instead of letting your gut dictating your brain.

Also, Adorama providing this socalled "service" is just silly and has nothing to do with concern for their customers. Anyone working in a large commercial company or running their own business should know that already. Adorama do this ONLY because they think it's obviously worth it for their bottom line. If they knew the Sigma lenses with utter crap they would drop them immediately. But the product is in their eyes worth it to go that extra mile so they can sell more lenses(they know are good anyway) to a group of "paranoid" customers who cant make up their minds.
Believe you me when I say that Adorama would NEVER EVER even contemplate this "service" if they did not get an obvious return from it.

People get so emotional about products that for some reason all common sense goes out the window? If you can get over the fanboyism and brand-logo-fetishism, then it's just another tool you use for your hobby.....that is all it is. Apple actually have an absolute horrible product reliablilty issue with most of their products, but for some reason their followers.....eeeehh I mean customers seem to forgive them and absolve them from any wrong doing :-) If you are interested in why this is, then just read some researches that were done on this subject comparing Apple customers to a religious sect......but I digress.

Accusing Sigma of any deficiencies that just might appear in a small percentage when buying their products is only valid if Canon's are 100% perfect.....which they are defintely not. Arguing about the difference in failure rate of which both are acceptable, is just academic hogwash.

P.S. Please excuse the directnes of this post. I am not native Dutch, but seem to have picked up this trait :-)

Ever hear the expression

"Where there's smoke there's a fire"

While I agree that the power of suggestions is certainly coming into play and some people are seeing things simply because they're there, the fact that this ever arose as an issue points to there being some truth behind it. The internet has a tendency to blow things out of proportion of course, and overall the likelihood of having focusing issues on a Sigma lens is probably minute, but all the chatter about seems to indicate that at the very least, Sigma's exhibit focusing issues far more frequently than Canon or Tamron lenses.

Many people out there own Tamron lenses, but I've never heard of focusing issues with Tamron lenses. There are also a number of Canon lenses that are known to have reliability problems of their own....like the 50mm 1.8 and 1.4, both of which I actually did have issues with.


focalpointsphoto.com (external link) - flickr (external link) - Instagram (external link)
α7ʀIV - α7ʀIII
Sigma 14-24 f2.8 ART - Zeiss Loxia 21 - Sigma 35 f1.2 ART - Sony 35 1.8 - Sony/Zeiss 55 1.8 - Sony 85GM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ntotrr
Member
73 posts
Joined Nov 2009
     
Feb 28, 2013 22:09 as a reply to  @ HelenOster's post |  #117

I'm biased, Sigma USA has treated me like I am a million-dollar customer. I use a Sigma SD15 DSLR along with a 7D. My first DSLR was a Sigma SD9, then and SD14 and now the SD15. My first and only Canon is the 7D (unless I was going to go full frame, there is no reason to switch from a 7D). I have 11 Sigma lenses:

50mm EX Macro (Sigma SA mount)
8-16mm DC HSM (Canon mount)
17-70mm DC OS HSM (in Sigma SA and Canon mount)
105mm EX DG Macro (Sigma SA mount)
70-200mm EX DG (Canon mount)
80-400mm EX DG OS (Sigma SA and Canon mount)
18-200mm DC OS (Sigma SA mount)
18-250mm DC OS HSM (Canon mount)
24-70mm EX DG (Sigma SA mount)

I had issues with two lenses, the 24-70mm and the 80-400mm. My wife accidently dropped my camera with the 24-70mm lens on it and damaged it. There was a nasty grinding noise when zooming the lens. Sigma repaired it free-of-charge even though I made it clear how it got damaged. The 80-400mm SA mount lens stopped focusing correctly. The lens has been out-of-production for some time so there was a good chance that no parts were available. Fortunately, there was a box pf parts for one lens on the shelf. The tech installed every new part they had into m lens. The repair was at no charge, even though the lens was long out-of-warranty.

I'm fortunate to live nearby Sigma USA so I can visit them when needed. My first DSLR, the SD9, was experiencing some AF problems. I was about to go to see my family in Greece and was concerned. They offered me a loaner while they had my lens but in the weeks before the trip, the camera seemed to be working so I kept it. The AF went wonky on me towards the end of my trip. I brought it to Sigma and they had to send it to Japan for repair. They offered a loaner and in six weeks my camera was back good as new. It was out of warranty by three years but there was no charge.

To top this all off, the Sigma EF-500 Super flash I had for my Sigma SD9 and SD14 was not compatible with m SD15. Some units could get a firmware upgrade but others could not and I had one of those. It was the president of Sigma USA who gave me the news. He offered me a new EF 610 Super flash at a discount. I was very appreciative but told him that I had to turn the offer down as I was out of work and couldn't justify spending any money on camera gear. He asked me to wait and then got the flash for me and asked me to take it as a gift. How cool is that? I also had the good fortune to meet the late chairman, Michihiro Yamaki, some years ago in Vermont. If any person could be described as a "true gentleman", it was Mr. Yamaki.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mwsilver
Goldmember
3,911 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 499
Joined Oct 2011
Location: Central New Jersey
     
Feb 28, 2013 22:11 |  #118

DarklingSmilie wrote in post #15662495 (external link)
I've owned many sigma lenses now, from fairly basic 70-300, 24-70 2.8, bigma etc and never had a problem yet, either with a used or new lens that I've bought. Only issue I have had was when looking for a 12-24 DG lens over the last few months I couldn't find a good one. Bought 2 off eBay and they both had similar issues with one side being softer than the other and tried 2 locally, one was soft on the left side and the other had back focusing issues. Obviously with used gear there could be issues with care by previous owners, for the minute I've settled on a Canon 17-40L.

I can't speak for Sigma in general, but many people buying the Sigma 30mm EX DC HSM have had a variety of issues and a number of purchasers have either exchanged their lenses ot sent to them to Sigma to be calibrated. My first copy was clearly decentered to the right. The second copy was perfect in that regard i'm I'm having a minor problem with occasional inconsistent AF. Others have had back and front focusing issues. I do wonder though if some of those issues are imagined rather than real. Shooting at f/1.4 at four of five feet away will result in a very shallow depth of field. Someone inexperienced with such a fast lens might have occasional trouble achieving the correct focus wide open and assume the lens is defective.


Mark
Canon 7D2, 60D, T3i, T2i, Sigma 18-35 f/1.8, 30 f/1.4. Canon EF 70-200 L f/4 IS, EF 35 f/2 IS, EFs 10-18 STM, EFs 15-85, EFs 18-200, EF 50 f/1.8 STM, Tamron 18-270 PZD, B+W MRC CPL, Canon 320EX, Vanguard Alta Pro 254CT & SBH 250 head. RODE Stereo Videomic Pro, DXO PhotoLab Elite, ON1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,425 posts
Likes: 2386
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Feb 28, 2013 22:40 |  #119

ntotrr wrote in post #15663413 (external link)
I'm biased, Sigma USA has treated me like I am a million-dollar customer. I use a Sigma SD15 DSLR along with a 7D. My first DSLR was a Sigma SD9, then and SD14 and now the SD15... .

I always wondered who bought the three Sigma DSLRs. :):):)


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Earwax69
Goldmember
Avatar
1,044 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jul 2012
     
Mar 01, 2013 02:50 |  #120

A big part of those accusing Sigma dont even own one. They just repeat the same old threads. While I do agree that older Sigma lenses had noisy AF and QC problems, they were also a third of the price of Canon/Nikon. However now that I own a new (and expensive) Sigma lens, I can say that this baby is something else. Silent, fast and reliable. It's now my best lens and I can only say that if people skip it because of Sigma bad rep, it's their lost.

For any lens you buy, just be sure you have a return policy in case something is wrong with the lens. For fast primes, having MA on your body is a must to compensate the gap in body/lens calibration.


Canon 6D | S35mm f1.4 | 135mm f2 The rest: T3i, 20D, 15mm f2.8, 15-85mm, 24mm f2.8, 50mm f1.8, 85mm f1.8, 90mm f2.8 macro, 55-250mm.
So long and thanks for all the fish

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

12,518 views & 0 likes for this thread
My take on Sigma
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 KopiLuwak
1000 guests, 267 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.