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

Just bought the 30 1.4 and love it on my 7D. Great color and SHARP! No MA or focus issues. Im a very happy sigma owner.

I may swap my Canon 85 1.8 for the Sigma 85 1.4???

PeyDay17 wrote in post #13696726
Just bought the 30 1.4 and love it on my 7D. Great color and SHARP! No MA or focus issues. Im a very happy sigma owner.

I may swap my Canon 85 1.8 for the Sigma 85 1.4???

I did that swap and sigma 85 is worth every penny, it's so much better than the canon 85 1.8! IQ, colour/contrast, sharpness, build etc are all leaps and bounds above the canon imo.

My copy is perfect straight out the box as well

I have 3 sigma lenses and love them all. I have the usual suspects in the 10-20 and the 17-50 and because of my success with them I recently got a 100-300 f4 and I am really digging that for my telephoto and it is one hell of a deal since discontinued($650 from $1100 on amazon at keh). Actually all of the good words on that lens I found here in searches pushed me to pull the trigger and I am happy I did.

As so many others, I just love my 17-50. It had some focusing issues, but this was easily fixed by sending camera+lens for AF adjustment. After that it's simply astonishing.

However, it pales in comparison to the 70 mm macro. That lens is among the sharpest you can find, regardless of focal length or brand, just check all the various review sites online.

As an example, my sister-in-law's wedding ring, shot wide open:

sigma 30mm f1.4 - its a gem of a lens. love the colours of the sigma - and though this one misses out of contrast in comparison to a canon - it does some magic with the pics. Most of the family shots come out so well on this baby.

Most of my lenses are Sigmas.. Been very happy so far with the Sigma lenses so far. The best lenses I have happen to be Sigmas.

As far as the longer focal length lenses such as the 50-500, most who have tried and failed I would guess don't know the issues that come with any extreme focal lengths such as 500mm at a distance. I think they see haze and atmospheric distortion and believe it is the lens- it usually is not.

From a Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX II.

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

Byte size: ZERO | Content warning: NOT AN IMAGE

I have a 'few' Sigma lenses.

I think I do okay with them...

I'm really hoping for HSM versions of the wide lenses. I love my 20mm and 28mm,but if they released a 24mm with HSM, I'd sell both lenses to get it.

Sigma 30mm f1.4 here for use with my 1dmk2. Got 35L and used on my 5dc. Sigma on 1dmk2 is as good on 1dmk2 as 35L on my 5dc. Both super sharp at f1.4.

Got sigma 50mm f1.4 and it looks very nice on my 5dc also.

I got my Sigma 30mm 1.4 a few days ago, it was a grey market import so little chance of getting it fixed if anything was wrong ... all I can say is WOW ... super cheap, and super sharp, very happy

This should be a short thread Actually my third Sigma has been a charm. I love my 30mm, its probably my favorite lens.

50 1.4 wide open,ISO 100 at 1/60 handheld.

All these happy Sigma owners? Outrageous! I though I was the only one
Am considering adding the 120-400 to my collection for when we go on our big Africa trip later in the year.

How do you guys with the 70-200 2.8 OS find it compares with the canon 70-200 2.8 IS mk1. I'm in the process of trying to sell my MP-E65 macro and 70-200 f4 non IS to get a 2.8 but not sure whether to go for the Sigma or the Canon. I've recently bought a Sigma 150-500 OS and although I haven't had time for any extensive tests, at first glance it looks like it could be a very good buy for the price I got it for.

modchild wrote in post #13697770
How do you guys with the 70-200 2.8 OS find it compares with the canon 70-200 2.8 IS mk1. I'm in the process of trying to sell my MP-E65 macro and 70-200 f4 non IS to get a 2.8 but not sure whether to go for the Sigma or the Canon. I've recently bought a Sigma 150-500 OS and although I haven't had time for any extensive tests, at first glance it looks like it could be a very good buy for the price I got it for.

I just shot some handheld poorly lit shots comparing the Sigma to the new MKII Canon and posted them in the Sigma thread. Some very minor contrast and WB differences which could have been caused by my daughter being in the room for one shot and not the other. Other than that...very, very close. I did some battery tests from a tripod with tons of light and the Canon is a little sharper wide open, but other than that...very difficult to tell the images apart.