Sigma SD 14

"Rita Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
At least Nikkor can be mounted on Canon

So can many other makers lenses, so what you are saying is the Canon is a
superior camera then :-)

MrT.

"Mr.T" MrT@home wrote in message
u...

"Rita Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
As for the lenses, what other brand of body do
these "L" lenses fit? A hint, if they don't universally fit other brands
and/or nobody wants to use them they are considered proprietary.

The reason you can use Nikon lenses on a Canon and not vice versa, is
simply
to do with the camera mount opening and distance between mount and sensor,
nothing more.
It says a lot for the quality of Canon cameras I guess if some people are
prepared to give up features, and pay extra for adapters, just to use a
Canon instead of Nikon body :-)

That's why most pro Canon shooters use Nikkors on their Mk IIIs

Does that mean the millions of pro shooters using Canon lenses don't use
the
MkIII then? :-)
(just have a look at any sporting event and see what lenses the pro's are
using!)

But frankly your constant advocacy of Nikon is very tiresome. Most makers
have both good and bad lenses in their range.

MrT.


Yes. I am Nikon shooter, and if I had a good quality Canon lens, I would
just buy a Canon body to use it on. However, I shoot film, and good quality
Canon bodies (like good Nikon bodies) are only cheap if they are film
bodies. Today, a good quality DSLR might cost over 2 thousand dollars, so it
might not be too practical to do this. Sooner or later, however, the price
of these things will come down to the point where you are better off having
a body to match all your good lenses than trying to mess around with
adapters that cross brand names.

"William Graham" wrote in message
. ..
Yes. I am Nikon shooter, and if I had a good quality Canon lens, I would
just buy a Canon body to use it on. However, I shoot film, and good
quality
Canon bodies (like good Nikon bodies) are only cheap if they are film
bodies. Today, a good quality DSLR might cost over 2 thousand dollars, so
it
might not be too practical to do this. Sooner or later, however, the price
of these things will come down to the point where you are better off
having
a body to match all your good lenses than trying to mess around with
adapters that cross brand names.

Or you could simply worry more about your photo's than your equipment!
I've used many brands over the last 30+ years, and I find many prime lenses
from all the big manufacturers are quite satisfactory and many of their
zooms are not.
Nothing too surprising there IMO.
I also find the people making the most noise about their lenses, hardly ever
make photo's which really show up the supposed differences anyway.
It's more of a status thing to many, and good luck to them. But I do wish
they'd give it a rest sometimes.

MrT.

One wonders what kind of wacko has THREE different brand DSLRs...




On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:52:18 -0500, "Peter Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

All the anti-Sigma bias can make you think twice, can't it? Try some of the
people who use one and ask their opinion. I just bought one a few weeks
ago. I've owned an SD9 for years. Is the SD14 the best camera? Depends on
what you want to do with it. I have two other DSLRs, a Nikon and an Olympus
and they are nice cameras but cannot equal the sharpness of the Sigma. The
SD14 is not the best low-light camera but it is a far cry better than its
predecessors.

The lens you indicated will not do justice to the camera. Try the 18-50mm
EX macro or the 50mm EX and you'll be quite pleased with the results. Stick
with the EX lenses.

Visit the Sigma forum on dpreview.com for some opinions or actual users
rather than opinions of those who've never held the camera, let alone used
it.

"S" wrote in message
.uk...
I have the chance of this package below and quite interested, this will be
my first SLR. It seems a good deal at £499.
Any thoughts or comments would be welcome.

thanks

5114578
Sigma SD-14 Digital SLR body
In Stock for Home Delivery 1 £499.99 £499.99

5000106
Sigma 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 DC (Sigma AF)
In Stock for Home Delivery 1 £79.99 FREE

1040183
Sigma UV 58mm EX Filter
Home Delivery Usually within 10 Days 1 £19.99 FREE

5120472
Sigma Lens Cleaning Cloth
Home Delivery Usually within 10 Days 1 £5.99 FREE

The kind of "wacko" who can afford it and appreciates that there is no
one camera out there that will serve all of one's needs. I'm poor so I
only have a Nikon and a Sigma. Sometimes I think it would be nice to
also have a Canon for it's high ISO performance though.

On 2008-01-21 20:03:43 -0700, Go-dot nospam@comcastnospamnet said:

One wonders what kind of wacko has THREE different brand DSLRs...




On Sat, 5 Jan 2008 12:52:18 -0500, "Peter Stavrakoglou"
wrote:

All the anti-Sigma bias can make you think twice, can't it? Try some of the
people who use one and ask their opinion. I just bought one a few weeks
ago. I've owned an SD9 for years. Is the SD14 the best camera? Depends on
what you want to do with it. I have two other DSLRs, a Nikon and an Olympus
and they are nice cameras but cannot equal the sharpness of the Sigma. The
SD14 is not the best low-light camera but it is a far cry better than its
predecessors.

The lens you indicated will not do justice to the camera. Try the 18-50mm
EX macro or the 50mm EX and you'll be quite pleased with the results. Stick
with the EX lenses.

Visit the Sigma forum on dpreview.com for some opinions or actual users
rather than opinions of those who've never held the camera, let alone used
it.

"S" wrote in message
. uk...
I have the chance of this package below and quite interested, this will be
my first SLR. It seems a good deal at £499.
Any thoughts or comments would be welcome.

thanks

5114578
Sigma SD-14 Digital SLR body
In Stock for Home Delivery 1 £499.99 £499.99

5000106
Sigma 18-50mm f/3.5-5.6 DC (Sigma AF)
In Stock for Home Delivery 1 £79.99 FREE

1040183
Sigma UV 58mm EX Filter
Home Delivery Usually within 10 Days 1 £19.99 FREE

5120472
Sigma Lens Cleaning Cloth
Home Delivery Usually within 10 Days 1 £5.99 FREE

You seem to have a well versed, rounded knowledge of
nothing, Strad. (sic)
I may not agree often with Mr Strat, but here, he is corrrect.

I used to be a Sigma dealer before I retired.
Yeah. Sure Doug. Was that before you were a decorated Canadian
Mountie? After you single-handledly brought back Apollo 13? Around
the same time you were revolutionising Linux programming and leading
the world in enlarging technology?


Sure thay (sic) did have a few flakey lenses in the early days.
Actually, quite few. A few goodun's too.

Canon have just as many, you know?
We are talking about cameras, you ****.

Yes, the SD9 had some problems with low light and
deep shadows.
Oh, and did you forget:
- scary (and often unfixable) colour balance, jaundiced skintones,
colour clipping and false blues
- jaggies (often confused by amateurs with sharpness)
- colour changes with ISO
- colour changes and unacceptable noise in long exposures
- no PC synch
- raw only output, poor raw processor
- overpriced for a camera that produced resolution roughly equivalent
to a 6Mp

TheSD10 wasn't a hell of a lot better either
We agree. They only managed to slightly improve the colour accuracy
clipping problems, but it got *worse* at high ISOs and long
exposures. Oh and they improved the raw processor. Wow.

Lets not forget or overlook the size of the company and the enormous
percentage of profit they devoted to research over the past 4 years
Too bad most of it was chasing the Foveon dream. It was a nice dream,
but one would have to assume that they simply cannot get this sensor
to improve at the rate it needs to, to even get near the current crop
of Bayer sensors. The dead horse has been kicked a bit far, imo.

People
like you seem to be on the payroll of Canon. Paid to bash anything
that looks like a threat to Canon.
Yeah, Doug. I'm on Canon's payroll too, then I guess.

The SD14 is no ground breaker
Again we agree!

but it is a huge
advancement on the earlier models
Yes.

and has finally reached the point of
being able to compete very favourably with some other makers cameras
NO.

OK they use a different math
to reach a pixel count
No, It's NOT OK. The SD-14 manages to be roughly equivalent to a ten
megapixel camera, not a 14. Both camps lie, so I'll concede that it
is not a clear cut situation. There's an interesting article he
http://www.ddisoftware.com/sd14-5d/
I have a lot of time for Mike Chaney, and so that page should give
Sigma supporters some comfort.
But I think he overemphasises the resolution and 3d-issues, forgetting
the colour accuracy issues, lousy high ISO/long exposure performance,
and the fact that you lock yourself into Sigma lenses at a ridiculous
price.

And the false sharpness/lack of aliasing can be a big problem, eg
he
http://www.marktphoto.com/examples/sd14-po-002_crop.jpg
This is an actual size crop from one of Sigma's sample images. Let's
not discuss the flesh tone...but take a look at the hair strands.
Note how they break into stair stepped segments - revealing the false
'sharpness'! It may seem razor sharp, but look out for the moire and
jaggies... Bayer sensors are indeed fuzzier, but they are already,
price-wise, way ahead of the SD14's resolution (roughly 8-9Mp
equivalent) once you realistically assess them.

Then there is their honesty..

http://www.sigma-sd14.com/sample-photo/still-life/

Take a look at the full-res version of the last pic, SL001.
Impressive, yes?
But now wind up the gamma/brightness... They have photoshopped the
background out! How can you trust a company that does that, on
allegedly sample images??

but the images are every bit as clean and
enlargable
Yes. We've seen your enlarging prowess and your quality standards.
Just ask Colin D about his *stitched* image sample... I'm sure you
and Sigma would get on very well.

On 1/21/08 4:28 PM, in article , "Rita
Berkowitz" wrote:

Annika1980 wrote:

As for the lenses, what other brand of body do
these "L" lenses fit? A hint, if they don't universally fit other
brands and/or nobody wants to use them they are considered
proprietary.

By that standard, just about any brand of lens is proprietary.

Sorry, Canon's lenses are a one Tennessee pony with worn out rectum show.
At least Nikkor can be mounted on Canon and a few other manufacturers'
bodies.

Spoken like an expert who has been mounted by most anything with two or four
legs...

"Rita Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
The reason you can use Nikon lenses on a Canon and not vice versa, is
simply to do with the camera mount opening and distance between mount
and sensor, nothing more.

Yep, Canon intentionally designed the EOS mount for the sake of attracting
photographers that had decent glass that didn't want to buy substandard
Canon glass.

Do you really believe all the crap you sprout!!!

It says a lot for the quality of Canon cameras I guess if some people
are prepared to give up features, and pay extra for adapters, just to
use a Canon instead of Nikon body :-)

November 2007 is when it all changed!

For such a "great" company it took them an AWFULLY long time then to come up
with something the pro's might actually want to use then!

MrT.

On Jan 22, 7:54*am, Annika1980 wrote: On Jan 20,
6:40*pm, D_Mac wrote: I used to be a Sigma
dealer before I retired. Sure thay did have a few flakey lenses in
the early days. Canon have just as many, you know? Yes, the SD9 had
some problems with low light and deep shadows. The SD 10 wasn't a
hell of a lot better either but let's not forget or overlook the
size of the company and the enormous percentage of profit they
devoted to research over the past 4 years that resulted in some
pretty decent products arriving last year.People like you seem to
be on the payroll of Canon. Paid to bash anything that looks like a
threat to Canon. That's a funny comment coming from the guy who
posed as George Preddy and shilled Sigmas on these newsgroups for so
long. *FWIW, it was your Preddy Cat pics that outed you.It's your
bare ass that outed you

"Go-dot" nospam@comcastnospamnet wrote in message
...
One wonders what kind of wacko has THREE different brand DSLRs...

One wonders what kind of a wacko cares about why someone has three different
brands.