Sigma Lens Quality

[pgbphotographytas]

Generally Sigma lenses are good quality and work well, I have heard of some issues with the longer telephotos (70-200mm F2.8 & 120-400mm) and sharpness / focusing issues. I have owned both of these lenses but have never had any issues with them (Pentax and Canon mount)

I am at the moment looking at a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro lens and wanted to know if they have the same quality control issues that the longer Sigma lenses have?

Paul

[I @ M]

Paul, all of the Sigma 'ex' grade lenses are built in much the same way from what I have seen.

And for what it is worth, I am really still waiting to see concrete proof that Sigma lenses have build quality issues on any greater scale than any OEM lens, be it Sony, Canon, Pentax, Nikon or whatever.

[pgbphotographytas]

Paul, all of the Sigma 'ex' grade lenses are built in much the same way from what I have seen.

And for what it is worth, I am really still waiting to see concrete proof that Sigma lenses have build quality issues on any greater scale than any OEM lens, be it Sony, Canon, Pentax, Nikon or whatever.

Thanks for that, I have only heard of issues with the larger telephoto models but bth of these I owned were great.

[I @ M]

And further for what it is worth, forget the 105 mm Sigma, have a look at the 150 mm instead. It is a truly impressive lens IMHO.

[pgbphotographytas]

And further for what it is worth, forget the 105 mm Sigma, have a look at the 150 mm instead. It is a truly impressive lens IMHO.

They don't make this in a Sony mount :(

[JM Tran]

I dont like how ppl rag on the quality control of Sigma, because they dont realize Sigma is the biggest lens manufacturer in the world! Pumping out lenses at a much higher number than Canon or Nikon etc yearly.

Higher production will always means a higher number of flawed products than those that make less. I know Canon have their share of faulty lenses, lets not even talk about the 1DMKIII debacle when it first came out.

I have always had faith in Sigma, and use it along with L and Nikkor lenses with confidence:)

[kiwi]

The 70-200 2.8 is softer than the Nikon equiavalent, as is the 120-300 and the 300

Ive had all 6

Now, it's only maybe 5%

Sony ?

I thought you currently used Nikon

Don't tell me you are changing brands again. Seriously.

[MarkChap]

Sony ?

I thought you currently used Nikon

Don't tell me you are changing brands again. Seriously.

Exactly the same I thought ??


Paul you said it yourself, both of the lenses you owned were fine, my 120-400, (whilst certainly no Canon 100-400L) is fine.
My fathers 17-70 appears to be fantastic little lens.

I would have very little reservations about buying Sigma lenses

[mrslodger]

Paul, you're a sony user? congrats, I see that there is a sigma 85mm soon to be released, keen to see the reviews on that one.

[Bill44]

Have a look at Thom Hogan's revue of the Sigma 30mm, he is not impressed.

[I @ M]

Have a look at Thom Hogan's revue of the Sigma 30mm, he is not impressed.

And your point is what Bill?

Does that mean because they make a lens that is less than perfect the whole range that they make is tainted?

If that is the case then there isn't a manufacturer of lenses on this planet that is worth considering.

They have all made lenses that were didn't match users expectations in some area.

[kiwi]

i'll chirp in twitter style that I think their QA process is much improved and largely a thing of the past and just as good as any

[davesmith]

Sony now hey? Unbelievable. If money is no object, and it seems it isn't, seek out a Minolta 100/2.8 macro.

Regarding Sigma itself, I have the 10-20 and 17-70 in Sony mount and can't really fault them.

[Bill44]

And your point is what Bill?

Does that mean because they make a lens that is less than perfect the whole range that they make is tainted?

If that is the case then there isn't a manufacturer of lenses on this planet that is worth considering.

They have all made lenses that were didn't match users expectations in some area.

Are you in the habit of putting words in peoples mouths?
I was merely pointing out that a respected reviewer has found a particular Sigma lens that he was not impressed with.

[I @ M]

No Bill, I am not putting words in peoples mouths.
This thread is about whether the Sigma macro lens suffered from any quality control issues allegedly as the longer telephoto lenses do.
I merely asked what your point was in your reply about the 30mm lens, which if I am correct is neither a macro or telephoto lens.
My point is that some people are all too quick to point out a fault or shortcoming in a product at each and every opportunity that they can
You posted about a respected reviewer not liking a particular lens that wasn't even part of the original posters question. I am sure that I can find plenty of reviews by respected reviewers on many lenses that aren't part of the original posters question as well.

And my point would be?

[Bill44]

No Bill, I am not putting words in peoples mouths.
This thread is about whether the Sigma macro lens suffered from any quality control issues allegedly as the longer telephoto lenses do.
I merely asked what your point was in your reply about the 30mm lens, which if I am correct is neither a macro or telephoto lens.
My point is that some people are all too quick to point out a fault or shortcoming in a product at each and every opportunity that they can
You posted about a respected reviewer not liking a particular lens that wasn't even part of the original posters question. I am sure that I can find plenty of reviews by respected reviewers on many lenses that aren't part of the original posters question as well.

And my point would be?

Well one poster said that three Sigma lenses were softer than the Nikon equivalent, and they weren't the lens under discussion. No comment was made by you.

Several posters praised lenses that were not the lens under discussion. Apparently that was OK by you.

I commented on a lens that was not under discussion. That was obviously not OK by you.

So just what is your point?

[ricktas]

I am at the moment looking at a Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro lens and wanted to know if they have the same quality control issues that the longer Sigma lenses have?


Well one poster said that three Sigma lenses were softer than the Nikon equivalent, and they weren't the lens under discussion. No comment was made by you.

Several posters praised lenses that were not the lens under discussion. Apparently that was OK by you.

I commented on a lens that was not under discussion. That was obviously not OK by you.

So just what is your point?

Cause the OP asked about longer telephoto lenses and a macro lens, the other replies were about longer lenses and comparisons of quality control to the Sigma ones. I don't see how the 30mm is either a tele lens or a macro?

[Bill44]

I get the picture, Bye Bye.

[I @ M]

Bill, I tend to think that the lenses referred to as being softer than the Nikon equivalent were reasonably described by the term 'longer telephoto lenses' in the original post.
Paul clearly asked about alleged softness and focus issues with longer telephoto lenses and whether the macro he was considering would suffer from the same alleged problems.
Kiwi responded with a valid observation that he had owned some of the Sigma longer telephoto lenses, one of which is directly mentioned in the OP, and that he had found them to be softer than the Nikon equivalent. I think that is a very fair and valid response to a question.

My point is --- you have brought up a lens that I assume that you have not personally had any experience with, does not come within a bull's roar of any of the lenses under discussion and from that you appear to be very much like so many other people on the net that like to point out flaws in a particular product and tar all the products from a manufacturer with the same brush.

[kiwi]

There are two things here

Sigmas purported general qa issue, which I think is largely historical

Performance of specific lenses

I'll add to my comments that I've also owned a sigma 180 macro which i think was very sharp and a sigma 50-150 that was ordinary at 2.8

I do think at f/4+ that all the sigmas i had were as practically sharp as the exotic nikons I know have, I think you pay extra for the equivalent sharpness at 2.8.

Is saying this if budget was a major concern I had and I would have no reservations in sigma at all

Sure, you might get a lemon, buts that's life, get a refund or an exchange


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ricktas]

I get the picture, Bye Bye.

That's the second time you have said Bye in the last week.:D

[arthurking83]

Bjorn Rorslett(he's more knowledgeable than Thom) highly recommend the Sigma 105 too :th3:

I also agree with the other comments that the quality of the Sigma 30mm lens has absolutely no bearing on how well a longer tele lens can be made(by the same manufacturer).

It's a completely different design brief compared telephoto design, and also a much harder to design a short focal length lens than it is to design a longer tele focal length lens.

Nikon make and and have made in their illustrious history some of the greatest telephoto lenses ever, and yet they've also made some very ordinary performing wide angle lenses too!

And, as Andrew said.. the Sigma 150mm macro is an outstanding lens!

Sony?? I'm assuming that it's for a friend?

[MarkChap]

No Arthur, Paul is now a Sony boy

[arthurking83]

... errr... Oh!

I'm gone for five minutes and ... errr .... oh! .... OK then ... I see

The more things change, the more they stay the same

I wonder what's going to happen if I come back in another 5 minutes :umm:

[pgbphotographytas]

Thanks everybody for the replies, it sounds like I should not be too worried about the quality of Sigma lenses. The lenses I have purchased in the past have been from a local store where as this will be online or even maybe second hand from eBay so I wanted to confirm the chances are it would be okay.

[kiwi]

Thanks everybody for the replies, it sounds like I should not be too worried about the quality of Sigma lenses. The lenses I have purchased in the past have been from a local store where as this will be online or even maybe second hand from eBay so I wanted to confirm the chances are it would be okay.

I'm still waiting on a rational explanation on why you have purchased a sony and if this means you are selling the d5000 or whatever you have, lol

I can hardly wait for the next instalment




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pgbphotographytas]

I'm still waiting on a rational explanation on why you have purchased a sony and if this means you are selling the d5000 or whatever you have, lol

I can hardly wait for the next instalment

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have had the Sony for a little while now, I enjoy using different brands of cameras the same as some people like driving different cars or having different video game consoles. After using somebody else's Sony I was keen to try one out which turned in to a purchase as I was very impressed with it after testing it, the logic behind it and the general feel and operation really sold me.

The D3000 went to a good home and is being well used by the new owner.

I have my own personal reasons for buying and selling cameras the way I do and if that makes me happy then that is what matters. Some people might say I am :crzy: but I really don't care. Life is too short to worry about what other people think / say about you. I have more then enough money to support myself and I always buy my cameras with cash.

[kiwi]

I just hope people don't think that changing brands will change their photography Paul, you know that's not the case. You are setting a terrible example for newbies here.

That's the sad thing

You are just wasting money, with what you have lost of changing over you could have one of the best kits of whatever brand you stuck with, would know it well, and would be producing good photos

That's the sad thing

I really don't understand, but I don't need to I suppose.

I just find it very frustrating to see you struggle for months each time to come to grips with a new camera, we all help you with lens and settings advice, then you throw all that down the toilet and start again, I find it a betrayal of sorts. Sorry to be honest but it's what I feel and I said last time you changed that if you did it again...well...here we are.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pgbphotographytas]

I just hope people don't think that changing brands will change their photography Paul, you know that's not the case. You are setting a terrible example for newbies here.

That's the sad thing

You are just wasting money, with what you have lost of changing over you could have one of the best kits of whatever brand you stuck with, would know it well, and would be producing good photos

That's the sad thing

I really don't understand, but I don't need to I suppose.

I just find it very frustrating to see you struggle for months each time to come to grips with a new camera, we all help you with lens and settings advice, then you throw all that down the toilet and start again, I find it a betrayal of sorts. Sorry to be honest but it's what I feel and I said last time you changed that if you did it again...well...here we are.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thanks for being so honest Kiwi, I appreciate it. Much like a drug addict can't stop taking drugs I can't stop buying cameras :eek: but having said that I have 13 days until I can't any more.

I have enjoyed trying all the different brands and doing that is what has made me happy and has helped me to deal with some tough times in my personal life.

[Scotty72]

If Paul wishes to buy 27 different camera brands within a month and then smash, smoke or trade them, it is his business... I don't see how this sets a bad example - or even if it does, it is none of their business.

He hurts no-one.

My Sigma 70-200 is great. Perhaps it is not 100% as sharp as a the equiv L, but at well under 1/2 the price, it is more than worth it.

Scotty

[smallfooties]

Hi paul,
I have the sigma 105mm for the nikon mount. I think it is an excellent piece of glass - i like it anyway. it has really nice bokeh and is sharp when you want it to be... focussing is abit noisy and not the fastest i don't think... but i've got 2 sigmas now and i do love them... hope i've made sense and have been of help...sorry if i don't...

[pgbphotographytas]

If Paul wishes to buy 27 different camera brands within a month and then smash, smoke or trade them, it is his business... I don't see how this sets a bad example - or even if it does, it is none of their business.

He hurts no-one.

My Sigma 70-200 is great. Perhaps it is not 100% as sharp as a the equiv L, but at well under 1/2 the price, it is more than worth it.

Scotty

Thanks Scotty :)


Hi paul,
I have the sigma 105mm for the nikon mount. I think it is an excellent piece of glass - i like it anyway. it has really nice bokeh and is sharp when you want it to be... focussing is abit noisy and not the fastest i don't think... but i've got 2 sigmas now and i do love them... hope i've made sense and have been of help...sorry if i don't...

Thanks for that, it sounds like it might be worth checking out.

[BLWNHR]

Sigmas purported general qa issue, which I think is largely historical

I do think at f/4+ that all the sigmas i had were as practically sharp as the exotic nikons I know have, I think you pay extra for the equivalent sharpness at 2.8.

I agree with these points 100%. I'm a long time Sigma user and am very impressed by the product. I will buy Nikkor in the future, but currently they are more than fit for purpose.

My 70-200 is brilliantly sharp at f/4, in both corners and centre, throughout the zoom range. F2.8 softens slightly and, like Kiwi, I think if you want sharp-wide-open lenses you need to buy 1st party.

As for QC problems, I've never had any failures, but do have differences in quality.
My 70-200 2.8 is brilliant.
My 24-70 2.8 is a great lens, and quite sharp unless your pixel peeping. But, it has slight BF or FF issues (can't recall which), and is noticably softer than the 70-200.
My 10-20 is probably my greatest disappointment. For a few months I borrowed a friends 10-20 and it was really sharp. When I got around to buying my own copy I've found it to be a bit soft.

[bigdazzler]

Ive only owned one ... the fabled 10-20 and it was fantastic, as we all know. I a considering the FF version, 12-24 in the near future for my upcoming trip to Europe. I have no hesitation buying Sigma.

[ricktas]

If Paul wishes to buy 27 different camera brands within a month and then smash, smoke or trade them, it is his business... I don't see how this sets a bad example - or even if it does, it is none of their business.

He hurts no-one.


Whilst I understand this sentiment and on one level I agree with you, I also strongly disagree at the same time.

Ausphotography members have gone out on a limb to give Paul good critique and advice on how he can improve his photography. Many Tasmanian members have stood beside Paul at AP Meets and have guided him personally. All these members (myself included) have wanted to see Paul's photography improve, and occasionally we have seen glimpses of work that tells us he has taken on board our comments and advice. But more often than not, he has gone completely the other way. I don't think I could count the times he has been advised to stop buying into new brands and learn how to take photos.

Photography is not nuclear physics, with some good basic rules anyone can produce some sound, reasonably high quality photos. Yet Paul has chosen to ignore all of that advice and continue to change brands. Even he stated at one point that he was swapping brands cause the 'advice' he had been given was that his current brand would not allow him to achieve his goals. I have no idea who was advising him, cause not one single AP member gave that advice out.

You say "He hurts no-one", but I for one (and quite a few other members from my conversations with them) are hurt. We feel Paul doesn't take our advice and guidance seriously and that when he does change gear (again), we all question why. So Paul can continue on his merry way, changing brands, and ignoring all our advice. Cause, I and a lot of others are over trying to help him and have our well meaning advice and every effort we make to help him in his photographic improvement thrown back at us. It comes across that Paul doesn't give a toss about the efforts we have put into helping him become a better photographer.

So we will go sit in the corner, licking our wounds, and give up trying to help Paul be a better photographer, and we will try and help those that take on board the sound advice that can be offered by many on Ausphotography. So your comment that he hurts no one, is not correct, in my eyes.

[ravescar]

Ritas, I think it is more that you were hurt because you care a lot for him to be a better photographer, perhaps too much, rather than that he had hurt anyone, that is a huge difference.

I think Paul may be the kind of the person that likes to play around with different camera gear rather than mastering photography.

It is analogous to the difference between a rich man who loves car and a professional racer. That rich man may own and drive tons of aston, lambo, and ferrari, but he may never wanted to become a professional racer himself. Whereas professional racer bond with his equipment, learn to unleash every ounce of its potential and make it truly sing on racetrack.

I see 0 thing wrong with it as long as both party are happy with what they do.

I do place a person who goes out of his way to promote art of photography and help other become better photographer, in higher regard.

But the person who does not heed other's advice and go out to do things that does not make sense are EVERYWHERE and it isn't really worth getting too disheartened over what they do. On the bright side person like him probably help these companies stay in business.

I hope you can broaden your view and having a more open mind about people here, I believe that would help the forum in the long term. Getting Paul to be a better photographer is not a make it or break deal.

There are many other things that probably deserve your bleeding heart more, like those who died to the flood going out taking photo of storms, and another one who recently lost his 5D to waves.

[ricktas]

Ritas, I think it is more that you were hurt because you care a lot for him to be a better photographer, perhaps too much, rather than that he had hurt anyone, that is a huge difference.

I think Paul may be the kind of the person that likes to play around with different camera gear rather than mastering photography.

It is analogous to the difference between a rich man who loves car and a professional racer. That rich man may own and drive tons of aston, lambo, and ferrari, but he may never wanted to become a professional racer himself. Whereas professional racer bond with his equipment, learn to unleash every ounce of its potential and make it truly sing on racetrack.

I see 0 thing wrong with it as long as both party are happy with what they do.

I do place a person who goes out of his way to promote art of photography and help other become better photographer, in higher regard.

But the person who does not heed other's advice and go out to do things that does not make sense are EVERYWHERE and it isn't really worth getting too disheartened over what they do. On the bright side person like him probably help these companies stay in business.

I hope you can broaden your view and having a more open mind about people here, I believe that would help the forum in the long term. Getting Paul to be a better photographer is not a make it or break deal.

There are many other things that probably deserve your bleeding heart more, like those who died to the flood going out taking photo of storms, and another one who recently lost his 5D to waves.

You have not been a member here long enough to criticise how I have approached this issue. There is a very long history here, and as I said in my post, I was not just talking on my own, I have had over 20 PM's and emails about this, and there are a lot of members who feel the same way I do.

sorry you feel I have a bleeding heart and am not open minded enough, and I don't appreciate the tone of your entire response. Consider yourself banned!

[bigdazzler]

Consider yourself banned!


:eek: well it was little out of line wasnt it ......

It amuses me to think that someone can come in and be a member for 37 days and feel that they more about a long term situation than the people that have been watching it unfold for god knows how long. :rolleyes:

Ah well off to whirlpool for him then ... :lol:

[Kym]

:eek: well it was little out of line wasnt it ......

Yes! Site rules...
[4] Members should be treated with respect and courtesy. Members are requested not to insult or make personal attacks on other members. ...
(Call Rick a bleeding heart was not smart)

[13] Members with under 30 days membership and 50 posts cannot post complaints about service/people/organisations/products/businesses, etc. Join in, build up a reputation on Ausphotography and then your views will be allowed.

[davesmith]

Agreed, the advice we've all given seems to be p!ssed into the wind. However...

The car analogy from ravescar was poor - someone may have the desire to own and drive exotic cars at will if they can afford it, but I doubt if anyone else driving such cars are offering advice on how to drive, nor does the driver ask how to drive it. That's where we have a problem here - we've offered the advice but it doesn't seem to be taken on board. To be fair, I didn't see any complaint either about people, maybe a poorly constructed repsonse without knowing the full story. But banned for it? A bit harsh, but oh well.

Back on topic though, and hopefully it helps for people who do search the forum for Sony and Sigma here, I offer some other advice in general. Optically I have no issue whatsoever with Sigma, but something I didn't think of previously, one thing I hate about Sigma is their rear lens caps. I don't know what it's like for other mounts, but all my Sigma caps seem to be spring loaded in some way. While they obviously fit the back of A mount lenses, they don't stay in place on the Minolta/Sony lenses. Often I'll dig in the bag and the rear cap is out there doing its own thing. This is an issue if I take off a Minolta/Sony lens and put on a Sigma - I take off the Siggy cap to put on the Sony lens I've just taken off and it won't stay on.

If I'm going to stuff an element I'd rather it be the front, not the rear so I want those rear caps sticking pretty solid.

[arthurking83]

In the older days their front caps used to be the most hideous contraptions ever invented!
Their Nikon rear caps are not the best either, but slightly better than the Tamrom equivalents.

I'd love to get a series of genuine (correct black types not the cheapo white garbage)Nikon rear screw on caps for my Sigmas and Tamrons.. but the Niokon caps retail at stupid prices!

Something not always considered by many peeps. The Sigma and Tamron rear caps have to be mounted in a specific manner where the two marks have to coincide, whereas the Nikon caps can be simply placed on the rear and twisted on(in any of the three possible mounting positions). In dusty windy conditions this can be the difference between your lens filling with debris or not.. fumbling with rear caps in such conditions is not advisable.

Later Sigma front caps look better, and as my 50/1.4 is the later centre pinch cap, it's also more secure, than the earlier vintage 10-20mm front cap. Almost without fail the oldstyle cap on the 102-0 would pop off the lens whilst in the bag.. untouched!, so i swapped them around as per the usage pattern. Last thing you want is the cap falling off in the bag and some unknown hard object falling into the space between front lens element and padded divider. Front lens elements are pretty tough.. but not that tough!

I dunno about their Sony lenses and caps, but if the lens is to be bought new, you will not only get yourself a great lens but better lens caps to boot!

[bigdazzler]

I dont have any Sigs at the moment, but my 10-20 front and rear cap used to fall off all the time. Was a massive PITA. I was always stopping to pick one of them up off the ground.

I have 2 Tamrons at the moment, 70-200 and 28-75. Both rear caps are good and stay on pretty snug, but the front cap on the tele falls off all the time. The 28-75 fits good and never falls off.

And the Sonys, CZ85 1.4 and 50 1.4 ... well everythings just awesome, even the caps :D