5 New Sigma Lenses (incl 85mm f1.4)

IN for the 85.... bout damn time, Sigma. And if any Sigma employees are reading this... pass it up the chain that the QC needs to be improved drastically.

05Xrunner wrote in post #9661296
some more information for the lenses
http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/quicklinks/pma/

Wow...SRP on 17-50mm is £899.99....that's more than Canon 17-55mm sells for

Atiyeh wrote in post #9661314
And if any Sigma employees are reading this... pass it up the chain that the QC needs to be improved drastically.

I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

Boys, he's all yours...

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

ummm.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

Actually snowboarder,

if Sigma released a FF foveon Dslr I would be very interested. I owned an SD-14 for a while and the sensor impressed me.

The quality of their EX lenses is outstanding. My 100-300 f/4 zoom has overall better IQ than my 300 f/4 IS prime. I own a Sigma 180 macro that,imo, is better (for my uses) than the 180L. Build is excellent and it has lasted me 6 years so far without a hitch.

As for Sigma's ability to innovate, I would put them at the top of the class in that department. It is Sigma's constant pressure on the big 2 that helps drive the improvements we've seen from Canon. So really, you oughta be thanking Sigma . At the very least, don't throw out the baby with the bath water.

The Sigma has the same minimum focus distance as the Canon 85/1.8...so no improvement there.

PS: My only Sigma, the 150 Macro is quite exceptional, imho, although a bit slow to focus shooting at non macro distances.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

I dont understand why you lack soo much info.

DiMAn0684 wrote in post #9661483
Wow...SRP on 17-50mm is £899.99....that's more than Canon 17-55mm sells for

Keep in mind Sigma's MSRPs are rediculously inflated..for instance the 50mm f/1.4 is listed as having a $730 MSRP when it sells for $500

and the 150-500 is listed at $1470...and it sells for $1000

So basically Sigma's MSRP is roughly 1.5x what it will sell for...

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.
Not only they are terrible quality wise, but most of them will stop working
when another new Canon camera comes up... Do they still "re-chip" their lenses?
Isn't Sigma also the same company which releases 6 versions of the same camera -
DP1, DP1b, DP1c etc? With the same old foveon sensor designed 10 years ago?
I wouldn't touch anything Sigma with a stick.

They make the only AF 50mm prime that I would own other than the 50L, and it's almost $1000 cheaper.

If the 85/1.4 competes as well with the 85L as Sigma's 50/1.4 does with the 50L, I'll be sold.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.

Because on the whole, Sigma makes lenses that are interesting in terms of focal length at a price that most people can afford, while giving you features Tokina and Tamron don't...They also give you things like hoods and cases on most of their lenses...

Look at my sig, See the gear I've owned? See the number of Sigmas? There were 3 of the bunch that I called "defective" the 24-70 (Though that was because the previous owned smacked it around a bit, it looked like it was dropped down the stairs, It functioned fine but the AF/MF clutch slipped, so that snot really "defective") the 150-500 which had a defective zoom ring that was much too tight, and the 105 macro that i bought used and was older than i expected so no, it did not work right on my 7D

However, i now understand Sigma likely would have rechipped it had i decided to keep it, in this instance the value i was getting buying it used once i factored in shipping it off wasnt really worth it...Great lens, just not at what i was going to pay

Sigma also has a 3-4 year warranty on EVERY lens they sell..Canon only gives you 1....

They've made improvements to the Foveon sensor, its not the same sensor even if it reads the same spec wise, and "that old foveon sensor" is actually pretty good from everything i've seen and ever read on it (Sadly i've never handled or shot Sigma SLRs because no place carries them)

And whats wrong with improving a basic fundamental model? How many people here want Canon to make the 5D Classic still? or re-release it in an old shell?

On top of this, getting back to the quality thing, its not like Nikon or Canon dont have gremlins, I remember reading a disturbing nubmer of reports about Nikon quality control on lenses like the 24-70 and 17-55 f/2.8...

And when it comes to Canon, the 50mm f/1.4 is a big lemon in terms of reliability, the 17-55 frequently collects dust like a vacuum cleaner bag (and is prone to IS and USM failures) the 24-70 had a long history of severe sharpness, the 100-400 IS and friction ring are prone to failing, the 50mm f/1.2 can have absurd levels of focus shift, I've seen people with 35Ls complaining they dont focus right...etc etc etc

I think really Sigma gets a hard time because its Sigma, I think people are not as quick to write about a defect or a problem with a Canon lens because its a Canon so they figure its "just that one" whereas people are more inclined to believe that because a Sigma is cheap, it must be automatically garbage, and thus when they get a defective one, its a big problem

Not saying thats entirely the problem, I will say I'm lucky having never received a Sigma that didn't focus perfectly fine out of the box, and I've yet to encounter one that doesnt...

Of course now im shooting myself in the foot and asking for it arent i....

Kenji, I'm with you. Sigma's EX lenses are nearly equivalent to Canon's Ls, and getting closer all the time it seems. i had my problems with the 50 and 30mm lenses, but that's not uncommon. I would still like a 50 if I can find one that focuses worth a darn.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.

Because I can buy 30% more lenses for my money over Canon. Their HSM and OS tech are good and their optics are also good.

KenjiS wrote in post #9662277
Keep in mind Sigma's MSRPs are rediculously inflated..for instance the 50mm f/1.4 is listed as having a $730 MSRP when it sells for $500

and the 150-500 is listed at $1470...and it sells for $1000

So basically Sigma's MSRP is roughly 1.5x what it will sell for...

this makes more sense. I was expecting to see that lens ~$700-$800.

snowboarder wrote in post #9661517
I really can't understand why anybody wants to buy a Sigma lens.

Sigmalux >>> 50L any day. Identical IQ, both have focus issues, but the Sigma's issues can be fixed with calibration.

Sigma 150 macro is probably one of the best macro lenses out there.

Bigmos is very competitive with 100-400L - possibly slightly lower IQ (IMO Bigma has identical IQ to 100-400L) and heavier, but 100mm more reach and better IS. If Bigma II has similar IQ to Bigma/100-400, it'll completely overshadow the Canon with it's better IS and longer reach, unless Canon can come up with either a 100-400L II with 4-stop IS, weather sealing and better sharpness at the long end, while retaining the small size and 77mm filter, or a 150-500 with size and weight similar to Bigmos.