If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
On 6/26/2012 5:04 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Robert Coe wrote: : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : were they? : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : ticket wins the main price. In other words, none. I thought as much. Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for the money. four lenses is nothing. lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly every model sigma lens made. well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. now they only carry sigma lenses if there's no alternative from another manufacturer. I once tried a Sigma lens, and I think I posted the result. the short of the story is that Sigma tried to convince me that the lens mount on my Nikon, was out of spec. A bad lens can happen to any manufacturer, but the indifference to reality turned me off Sigma. I later tried other Sigma lenses without issue, except a strong reluctance to trust them. -- Peter |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 17:04:13 -0400, nospam wrote:
: In article , Robert Coe : wrote: : : : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : : were they? : : : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : : ticket wins the main price. : : In other words, none. I thought as much. : : Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are : they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for the : money. : : four lenses is nothing. No, zero (the number of Sigma lenses Wolfgang has owned) is nothing. : lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly : every model sigma lens made. : : well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific : failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the : box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a : runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. : there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. I've read it. I have no way of knowing how accurate it is. (And I haven't read Sigma's rebuttal, if any.) All I can say is that our experience, gained over several years, doesn't support Lensrentals' conclusions. : now they only carry sigma lenses if there's no alternative from another : manufacturer. So what's been your first-hand experience with Sigma lenses, "Nospam"? Bob |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
In article , PeterN
wrote: I once tried a Sigma lens, and I think I posted the result. the short of the story is that Sigma tried to convince me that the lens mount on my Nikon, was out of spec. A bad lens can happen to any manufacturer, but the indifference to reality turned me off Sigma. I later tried other Sigma lenses without issue, except a strong reluctance to trust them. they're repeatedly shown they can't be trusted. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
In article , Robert Coe
wrote: : : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : : were they? : : : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : : ticket wins the main price. : : In other words, none. I thought as much. : : Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are : they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for : the money. : : four lenses is nothing. No, zero (the number of Sigma lenses Wolfgang has owned) is nothing. that's an assumption on your part since he gave no number on how many he's owned. it could be zero or it could be many. not that it matters. how many he or anyone else personally owns is not significant. you've owned four, but four lenses out of the millions that sigma makes, is *nothing*. it's meaningless. lensrentals has purchased *thousands* of sigma lenses, as well as thousands of lenses from other companies, including nikon, canon, tokina, tamron and others. they are in the *best* position to comment on sigma's quality (or lack thereof). other lens rental companies could comment as well, as could repair shops on which lenses frequently come in for repair. it's well known that sigma lenses have a huge quality control problem. some even say the name sigma stands for significant malfunction. there are countless threads on dpreview where people have had to go through several copies to get one that works. many people will not consider sigma because they've been burned before, often more than just once. : lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly : every model sigma lens made. : : well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific : failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the : box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a : runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. : there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. I've read it. I have no way of knowing how accurate it is. (And I haven't read Sigma's rebuttal, if any.) sigma's rebuttal was to force lensrentals to pull their sigma saga page, where they described the runaround that sigma gave them about repairing lenses that were doa. sigma blamed lensrentals for damage, which is absolute nonsense since the lenses were *new*, dead out of the box, never rented to anyone. sigma didn't want the truth to be known so forced the issue. All I can say is that our experience, gained over several years, doesn't support Lensrentals' conclusions. you are either extremely lucky or aren't fussy. buy a lottery ticket. : now they only carry sigma lenses if there's no alternative from another : manufacturer. So what's been your first-hand experience with Sigma lenses, "Nospam"? once again, personal experience for me or anyone else makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. sigma makes millions of lenses. buying a couple of lenses is *not* significant. it means nothing. what *is* significant are things such as lensrental's repair rates. also, sigma reusing lens id chips, which means that if you put a particular lens on your camera, the *wrong* lens id is written to the exif. or that nikon sued sigma for stealing nikon's intellectual property on image stabilization. they totally ripped off canon for their own sigma mount lenses. and if that's not enough, sigma used to make lenses that were held together with cellophane tape, which not surprisingly, failed and lens elements fell out. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
nospam wrote:
In article , Robert Coe wrote: : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : were they? : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : ticket wins the main price. In other words, none. I thought as much. Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for the money. four lenses is nothing. lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly every model sigma lens made. well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. now they only carry sigma lenses if there's no alternative from another manufacturer. If Sigma lenses are as bad as they say, I'm surprised that none of the Sigma lenses I have or are owned and much appreciated by several of my local photographer friends have given us any problems. That good luck should have stretched so far if most Sigmas are crap seems stretching luck and probability rather far. I note when reading lens reviews that some Sigma lenses seem to have been notoriously troublesome, while some others seem to be well regarded for build, optical quality, and consistency. I wonder, could it possibly be the case that some Sigma lenses are good and some are bad, and you can find out which are which by checking reviews etc? Could it possibly be that lensrentals have fallen out with Sigma over some service issues and are trying to get their own back? What other lens rental agencies report similar problems? -- Chris Malcolm |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
In article , Chris Malcolm
wrote: If Sigma lenses are as bad as they say, I'm surprised that none of the Sigma lenses I have or are owned and much appreciated by several of my local photographer friends have given us any problems. That good luck should have stretched so far if most Sigmas are crap seems stretching luck and probability rather far. I note when reading lens reviews that some Sigma lenses seem to have been notoriously troublesome, while some others seem to be well regarded for build, optical quality, and consistency. I wonder, could it possibly be the case that some Sigma lenses are good and some are bad, and you can find out which are which by checking reviews etc? Could it possibly be that lensrentals have fallen out with Sigma over some service issues and are trying to get their own back? What other lens rental agencies report similar problems? sometimes you can get a decent sigma lens but it's a crap shoot. the reality is that most people don't care. they buy sigma because it's cheap and they're happy. very, very few people pixel peep or take pictures of test charts to see if their lens is functioning properly. if their photos look reasonably good, then as far as they're concerned, the lens works fine. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
Wolfgang Weisselberg writes:
Alan Browne wrote: On 2012-06-17 14:55 , nospam wrote: In article , Alan Browne Sigma does produce a few very good lenses. if you luck out and get a good one, yes, but unfortunately, their quality control is all over the map and it might take several copies to do that. In particular the FF 180mm f/3.5 (1:1) macro gives stellar results while the tamron 180mm is a far more reliable choice than the sigma 180, Since I have DIRECT knowledge of the Sigma in question I know there are no doubts as to its quality - build and esp. in light of the images it produces. A friend (who photographs more than most people) has had the "film era" f/3.5 version for over 10 years and continues to put it to great use. I'll take his experience and photos over net lore. Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. My three Sigma lenses have all been good copies as well. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
nospam writes:
four lenses is nothing. lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly every model sigma lens made. well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. Yeah, but those claims of hugely high failure rates ring false -- and four lenses is getting to the point where "90% failure" should probably show up. I strongly suspect people who rent lenses are much harder on them than I am on lenses I'm using. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
On Tue, 26 Jun 2012 13:37:49 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg
wrote: : Robert Coe wrote: : On Sun, 24 Jun 2012 02:37:11 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg : : Robert Coe wrote: : : On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:27:56 +0200, Wolfgang Weisselberg : : : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : : were they? : : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : : ticket wins the main price. : : In other words, none. I thought as much. : : Looks like you try to invent facts. The only fact I've "invented" is that you've never owned any Sigma lenses. If I'm wrong about that, please set me straight. : Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are : they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for the : money. : : Ok. You own *F*O*U*R* Sigma lenses. Probably bought over : several years. How many percent of Sigma's lenses are they? : : Consider: their annual turnover is 36 billion yen (that's roughly : 450 million USD). : : See the point why 4 so-so-but-real-cheap lenses just don't say much? : We get many more 1 million EUR lottery winners per year ... : from a single lottery. I didn't say that my ownership of four Sigma lenses says anything. I only mentioned it so that when I pointed out that you don't own any, you couldn't say that I don't either. You, not I, are the one making claims about the poor quality of Sigma lenses. And those claims are based on *no* first-hand experience. Right? Bob |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Sigma highlights another problem with plastics, thermal change
On Wed, 27 Jun 2012 15:17:03 -0400, nospam wrote:
: In article , Robert Coe : wrote: : : : : : Doesn't say much about problems with QC. You two 'lucked out' : : : : and got a good copy. Noone says Sigma cannot build good lenses : : : : --- only that they don't do that consistently enough for comfort. : : : : : : How many Sigma lenses have you ever owned, Wolfgang? How good : : : were they? : : : : : : I shall refer you to lensrentals.com, who have owned *many* dozen. : : : : : : Another 1 or 3 or 10 lenses from me doesn't make a difference : : : to statistics. Just as one lottery winner doesn't mean every : : : ticket wins the main price. : : : : In other words, none. I thought as much. : : : : Since I suppose you'll ask, or assume, my wife and I own four of them. Are : : they the best lenses we own? No. But all have been a very good value for : : the money. : : : : four lenses is nothing. : : No, zero (the number of Sigma lenses Wolfgang has owned) is nothing. : : that's an assumption on your part since he gave no number on how many : he's owned. it could be zero or it could be many. not that it matters. : : how many he or anyone else personally owns is not significant. you've : owned four, but four lenses out of the millions that sigma makes, is : *nothing*. it's meaningless. : : lensrentals has purchased *thousands* of sigma lenses, as well as : thousands of lenses from other companies, including nikon, canon, : tokina, tamron and others. they are in the *best* position to comment : on sigma's quality (or lack thereof). : : other lens rental companies could comment as well, as could repair : shops on which lenses frequently come in for repair. : : it's well known that sigma lenses have a huge quality control problem. : some even say the name sigma stands for significant malfunction. there : are countless threads on dpreview where people have had to go through : several copies to get one that works. many people will not consider : sigma because they've been burned before, often more than just once. : : : lensrentals has *hundreds* of sigma lenses. dozens *each* of nearly : : every model sigma lens made. : : : : well they used to, until they found out that sigma lenses had horrific : : failure rates, as high as 90% (really). many of them failed out of the : : box, before they were even rented to anyone. worse, sigma gave the a : : runaround to get them fixed, blaming lensrentals for breaking them. : : there was a lengthy blog on their website about it. : : I've read it. I have no way of knowing how accurate it is. (And I haven't read : Sigma's rebuttal, if any.) : : sigma's rebuttal was to force lensrentals to pull their sigma saga : page, where they described the runaround that sigma gave them about : repairing lenses that were doa. sigma blamed lensrentals for damage, : which is absolute nonsense since the lenses were *new*, dead out of the : box, never rented to anyone. sigma didn't want the truth to be known so : forced the issue. : : All I can say is that our experience, gained over : several years, doesn't support Lensrentals' conclusions. : : you are either extremely lucky or aren't fussy. buy a lottery ticket. : : : now they only carry sigma lenses if there's no alternative from another : : manufacturer. : : So what's been your first-hand experience with Sigma lenses, "Nospam"? : : once again, personal experience for me or anyone else makes no : difference in the grand scheme of things. sigma makes millions of : lenses. buying a couple of lenses is *not* significant. it means : nothing. : : what *is* significant are things such as lensrental's repair rates. : also, sigma reusing lens id chips, which means that if you put a : particular lens on your camera, the *wrong* lens id is written to the : exif. or that nikon sued sigma for stealing nikon's intellectual : property on image stabilization. they totally ripped off canon for : their own sigma mount lenses. and if that's not enough, sigma used to : make lenses that were held together with cellophane tape, which not : surprisingly, failed and lens elements fell out. Translation of the above: "Nospam", like Wolfgang, has never owned any Sigma lenses. Bob |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Black and white dynamic range problem - selective color change? | Peabody | Digital Photography | 19 | November 6th 09 11:23 PM |
FA -eBay- 20th Century Plastics (Poly) Slide/Negative Pages | Wade | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | September 4th 06 08:37 PM |
The horror of plastics | Rich | Digital SLR Cameras | 112 | January 12th 06 01:35 AM |
sigma 18-35 lens problem? | tbm | Digital Photography | 5 | September 27th 04 02:13 PM |
Change in Enlarger Head Height corresponds to Change in Exposure Time, but by how much? | Gregory W Blank | In The Darkroom | 32 | August 17th 04 12:11 AM |