SIGMA OWNERS UNITE! Enough with the bad how bout the good!

gremlin75 wrote in post #13991412
So I got my sigma 70-200 OS today.......Oh. My. God. I should have gotten this over the canon f4 IS in the first place. It's is just as sharp as the canon f4 IS at f4 and does better then I remember at f2.8 as well (I OT to use one several months back). Not as sharp as the canon f2.8 mark 2 but not $1000 less sharp

Knew you wouldn't be disappointed.

kfreels wrote in post #13995059
Knew you wouldn't be disappointed.

Well unfortunately it seems my canon f4 was disappointed.

After I decided to get the sigma and sell my canon the focus mechanism on my canon took a crap on me.

Weirdest problem, it will focus fine (manual and auto) if it's level with the ground. However if you angle it up it will go to infinity but not back to near or if you angle it down it will go to near but not back to infinity (in auto or manual). So I get to spend $200 to get it fixed before I can even sell it. So much for L build quality!! (only had it for a little over a year and I have babied the hell out of it)

This is a phone pic its nothing,
But to all my sigma brothers believe me the pictures are coming!!!!

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Some images I shot with my Sigma 24-70 2.8 HSM

Since this is a Sigma fan-boy thread, here is one of my latest with the 80-400 OS.

@zancho nice pics did u do a lot of post editing on
Them pics cause damn they look real professional

pkilla wrote in post #13997275
@zancho nice pics did u do a lot of post editing on
Them pics cause damn they look real professional

Haha, thanks!~ The only ones that got any real serious editing were 1 and 3. The others were very light, the usual blemish removal, color correction and some skin smoothing were all I really did.

Zansho wrote in post #13998220
Haha, thanks!~ The only ones that got any real serious editing were 1 and 3. The others were very light, the usual blemish removal, color correction and some skin smoothing were all I really did.

@zansho damn u pretty good That sigma lens is pretty nice.
I just got the 17 to 50 and I'm loving it...
quick question I know u must print those beautiful pics,
Any advice on where to print blown out prints and high quality pics
Besides a Walgreens or CVS......

I usually get my bigger prints done by mpix - www.mpix.com. They do pretty nice work, and they're reasonably priced.

Might also want to give their luster and metallic prints a try.

Zansho wrote in post #13998666
I usually get my bigger prints done by mpix - www.mpix.com. They do pretty nice work, and they're reasonably priced.

Might also want to give their luster and metallic prints a try.

OK thanks man

I rate my sigma 400 f5.6 APO, Macro HSM very highly, chipped for use on 5Dmk2 / 60D and performs nearly as well as my old canon f 5.6 L (takes the kenko DGX pro 1.4XTC and gives me an auto-focusing 560mm lens on the 5Dmk2 as well!)

Only cost £299

Zansho wrote in post #13997039
Some images I shot with my Sigma 24-70 2.8 HSM

Funny thing is, I'm actually contemplating selling it to fund the purchase of the Canon 24-70 2.8 II. That, or the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC. I like this lens, don't get me wrong, but I'd like to have IS that the Tamron has, and the Canon offering looks very nice.

So what body were 2, 4, and 7 shot on?

I've had nothing but praise for all the Sigma lenses I've owned.

24/1.8, 50/1.4, 24-70 HSM, 85/1.4, 150/2.8. I'm a Sigma junkie. Comes with working in chemistry, where another Sigma with low prices on goods does business...

I've owned seven Sigma lenses, with three in current use, and I've never had a bad one. Even when my 50-500 did become faulty after several years of use, it came back from Sigma service as good as new.

kfreels wrote in post #14003996
So what body were 2, 4, and 7 shot on?

1D Mark IIN I believe for all of them. 4 might have been my 7D. In all honesty, I prefer my 1D body over my 7D.