Canon 20D lenses: Canon vs Sigma

"Crownfield" wrote in message
...
"George" is just blowing smoke...

the preddiot always blows...



....something.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

In article , Peter A.
Stavrakoglou wrote:

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
In article WKO6d.3897$Hz.2809@fed1read04, Mark M
wrote:

Cite a verifiable source for this please.
You won't, however, because it doesn't exist.

Don't hold your breath. Take everything George says and the exact
opposite is usually closer to the truth.

Sounds like you could be talking about yourself.

Why don't you attack the other guys here that put down Sigma? Better
yet...why don't you try using REAL cameras instead of 3.42MP kiddie
toys?

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
In article , Peter A.
Stavrakoglou wrote:

"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message
...
In article WKO6d.3897$Hz.2809@fed1read04, Mark M
wrote:

Cite a verifiable source for this please.
You won't, however, because it doesn't exist.

Don't hold your breath. Take everything George says and the exact
opposite is usually closer to the truth.

Sounds like you could be talking about yourself.

Why don't you attack the other guys here that put down Sigma? Better
yet...why don't you try using REAL cameras instead of 3.42MP kiddie
toys?

The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

In article , Peter A.
Stavrakoglou wrote:

The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

The difference is...I'm right.

In article , Peter A.
Stavrakoglou wrote:

The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

The difference is...I'm right.

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message .net...
The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

If you put down Sigma at all, you're insecure. Sigma makes some of
the best lenses around right now, no one in the know disputes that.
But then again at $6K a lens should do alright. Then again, again,
the 50mm EX Macro is only $200 and it is the run away best 50mm lens
availble right now, and the 24-70 HF f3.5 ($80) is also the best in
its class (the slow 24-70s). The 15-30 has no competion at all, not
only is it the sharpest but also the widest lens in its class. The
24-70 EX recently beat Canon and Nikon so badly in a Practical
Photography magazine showdown that the magazine scoffed at the big
manufactures for being inept on delivering anything resembling value.
The 105mm is unmatched on performance and value. The Sigma 120-300
($2500), 100-300 ($800), and 70-300 APO ($200) are the top three rated
lens is that class 1, 2, 3. Even the $200 70-300 APO beat everything
avaialble at any price from Nikon and Canon...
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel. The 12-24 EX
has no competition. The 50-500 EX has no competition. The 300-800 EX
has no competition. The 80-400 EX has no competition. Those off the
top of my head.

"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message .net...
The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

If you put down Sigma at all, you're insecure. Sigma makes some of
the best lenses around right now, no one in the know disputes that.
But then again at $6K a lens should do alright. Then again, again,
the 50mm EX Macro is only $200 and it is the run away best 50mm lens
availble right now, and the 24-70 HF f3.5 ($80) is also the best in
its class (the slow 24-70s). The 15-30 has no competion at all, not
only is it the sharpest but also the widest lens in its class. The
24-70 EX recently beat Canon and Nikon so badly in a Practical
Photography magazine showdown that the magazine scoffed at the big
manufactures for being inept on delivering anything resembling value.
The 105mm is unmatched on performance and value. The Sigma 120-300
($2500), 100-300 ($800), and 70-300 APO ($200) are the top three rated
lens is that class 1, 2, 3. Even the $200 70-300 APO beat everything
avaialble at any price from Nikon and Canon...
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel. The 12-24 EX
has no competition. The 50-500 EX has no competition. The 300-800 EX
has no competition. The 80-400 EX has no competition. Those off the
top of my head.

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
In article , Peter A.
Stavrakoglou wrote:


The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.


The difference is...I'm right.

This attitude is the bain of newsgroups. Alas, the norm and not the
exception. sigh

Clyde

In article Siz7d.293146$mD.253099@attbi_s02, Clyde
wrote:

The difference is...I'm right.

This attitude is the bain of newsgroups. Alas, the norm and not the
exception. sigh

Sigma is and has always been crap. But feel free to waste your money
on their mediocre products.

Preddy, who probably has never owned a camera and definately does not own a
Sigma camera is, as usual, lying. He lies about everything, as he is a pure
troll. Here is the truth about Sigma as observed by me - a person with 38
years of experience with cameras.
Sigma build quality is less than ideal, the lenses do tend to fall apart.
Sigma compatibility is bad. They reverse engineer the mounts in order to
save a few buck on license fees - consequently a Sigma that will work on a
current model might not work on future models. Sigma claims they will
re-chip lenses but they fudge this too.
A friend sent them a lens that took six months to re-chip and it came
back ready to go on his Elan II but then would not work on my EOS 3 - a
model that was on the market when the lens was sent in for re-chipping.
Sigma would not re-chip it a second time.
My own Sigma lens that was "Too old" to rechip - it was six years old. I
was still using my 13 year old first Canon zoom on our fifth Canon body at
the time so I have a different view of "old" than the slime buckets at
Sigma.
You are trading price for performance AND for permanence. Sigma is always
a bad deal.




--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Georgette Preddy" wrote in message
om...
"Peter A. Stavrakoglou" wrote in message
.net...
The other guys in here that put down Sigma are not as predjucied in
their
viewpoints nor do they paint with such a broad brush. You complain
about GP
but you are no different except with an opposite opinion.

If you put down Sigma at all, you're insecure. Sigma makes some of
the best lenses around right now, no one in the know disputes that.
But then again at $6K a lens should do alright. Then again, again,
the 50mm EX Macro is only $200 and it is the run away best 50mm lens
availble right now, and the 24-70 HF f3.5 ($80) is also the best in
its class (the slow 24-70s). The 15-30 has no competion at all, not
only is it the sharpest but also the widest lens in its class. The
24-70 EX recently beat Canon and Nikon so badly in a Practical
Photography magazine showdown that the magazine scoffed at the big
manufactures for being inept on delivering anything resembling value.
The 105mm is unmatched on performance and value. The Sigma 120-300
($2500), 100-300 ($800), and 70-300 APO ($200) are the top three rated
lens is that class 1, 2, 3. Even the $200 70-300 APO beat everything
avaialble at any price from Nikon and Canon...
http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm#Ztelel. The 12-24 EX
has no competition. The 50-500 EX has no competition. The 300-800 EX
has no competition. The 80-400 EX has no competition. Those off the
top of my head.