More reasons to avoid Sigma

On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:02:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's products
should be avoided.

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses. But I'm damned
if I see why this is one of them.

Bob

On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 16:54:00 -0400, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:02:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's products
should be avoided.

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses. But I'm damned
if I see why this is one of them.


I believe it is a matter of Sigma not licensing the lensmount
interfaces, but reverse engineering them.

Sounds to me more like Sony yet again going more proprietary in order to
lock in customers to their products.

I have been avoiding Sony products ever since the rootkit fiasco, however
due to a substantial A-mount glass collection (some Minolta, much not) I am
considering a FF Sony when they sort out the prices. I will however want a
pretty cast iron guarantee that any lens that works on my current film
camera will work on a digital one.


"Robert Coe" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:02:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two
camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's
products
should be avoided.

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the
situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses. But I'm
damned
if I see why this is one of them.

Bob

In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's products
should be avoided.

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

sigma has a long history of doing a poor job in reverse engineering
lens protocols and it's quite common for their lenses to not work on
newer cameras.

in other words, this is not at all surprising.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses. But I'm damned
if I see why this is one of them.

it may not be at the top of the list but it's certainly one of the
reasons.

On 9/11/2010 5:27 PM, nospam wrote:
In , Robert Coe
wrote:

: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's products
should be avoided.

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

sigma has a long history of doing a poor job in reverse engineering
lens protocols and it's quite common for their lenses to not work on
newer cameras.

in other words, this is not at all surprising.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses. But I'm damned
if I see why this is one of them.

it may not be at the top of the list but it's certainly one of the
reasons.

I dunno how it is with their lenses, but Sigma doesn't seem to be able
to reverse engineer their _own_ protocol with flashes--try to get an
EM-140 to work as E-TTL master for a 530 DG Super on a Canon.

On 10-09-11 16:54 , Robert Coe wrote:
On Sat, 11 Sep 2010 15:02:23 -0400, Alan Browne
wrote:
: Per Sigma: "Sigma's lenses for Sony mount may have a potential aperture
: operation problem when used with the Sony ?33 and ?55 Interchangeable
: Lens digital cameras.
:
: To overcome this issue, we will be offering, free of charge, a
: modification service to our customers who have purchased a Sony ?33 and
: ?55 and own Sigma lenses for Sony mount.
: This phenomenon will only occur with Sony ?33 and ?55 cameras. Future
: production of Sigma lenses will be fully compatible with these cameras."
:
: Mo
: http://www.sigma-photo.co.jp/english...nfo_100910.htm

In other words ...
Sigma offers a free upgrade to make their lenses compatible with two camera
models that didn't exist when the lenses came out. Therefore, Sigma's products
should be avoided.

Sigma also offer "free" re-chipping of their lenses to make them
compatible with "new" bodies. Once. Thence it costs or is not
supported because the lens is obsolete.

If you actually believe that is "free" then you don't have a concept of
free. To me free means I don't lose a lens for weeks while its being
re-chipped, free means not having to deal with it and pay mailing costs,
free means free of hassle. Sigma provides nothing "free".

Is that really your position? What more do you think Sigma could or should
have done? Can you think of a company that would have handled the situation
better? Enquiring minds want to know.

There may be any number of reasons not to buy Sigma's lenses.

But I'm damned
if I see why this is one of them.

Repent then. Or go on buying Sigma lenses and remain damned.


--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

On 10-09-11 17:19 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Sounds to me more like Sony yet again going more proprietary in order to
lock in customers to their products.

No proof of that at all. The old Minolta lenses work fine on the alpha
cameras including the recent two.


I have been avoiding Sony products ever since the rootkit fiasco, however

There is absolutely no relationship between the rootkit fiasco and the
camera group at Sony. The later are the old "Minolta" group who now
wear Sony badges.

due to a substantial A-mount glass collection (some Minolta, much not) I am
considering a FF Sony when they sort out the prices. I will however want a
pretty cast iron guarantee that any lens that works on my current film
camera will work on a digital one.

The only lens that is not 100% compatible on the Sony bodies is the 1-3x
macro lens (for reasons that I don't recall at present). All other
Minolta A-mount lenses work without fault on the Sony bodies. Sony have
declared that compatibility with A-mount lenses is inherent in their
alpha line. Indeed, there is an adapter to take these lenses onto the
NEX mount as well as the new HD video cameras.

I'm not sure what your "sort out the prices" issue is with the two FF
bodies from Sony, but I suspect Sony will be coming out with a new FF in
the near future. This means lower prices on the a900/850 (maybe) and no
means of knowing what the new FF body will be priced at.

Don't top post.


--
gmail originated posts are filtered due to spam.

OK I won't

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
On 10-09-11 17:19 , R. Mark Clayton wrote:
Sounds to me more like Sony yet again going more proprietary in order to
lock in customers to their products.

No proof of that at all. The old Minolta lenses work fine on the alpha
cameras including the recent two.


I have been avoiding Sony products ever since the rootkit fiasco, however

There is absolutely no relationship between the rootkit fiasco and the
camera group at Sony. The later are the old "Minolta" group who now wear
Sony badges.

The rootkit fiasco (where Sony issued malware a second time after being
caught once) is just the worst manifestation of a company culture across all
divisions: -

other disgraceful examples include

DRM problems

PS3 advertised features removed post sale

Virtualization disabled on VAIO laptops

And there is another one about locking PS3's so users can't play their own
or 3rd party games.

Only crapple are [a lot] worse for this.



due to a substantial A-mount glass collection (some Minolta, much not) I
am
considering a FF Sony when they sort out the prices. I will however want
a
pretty cast iron guarantee that any lens that works on my current film
camera will work on a digital one.

The only lens that is not 100% compatible on the Sony bodies is the 1-3x
macro lens (for reasons that I don't recall at present). All other
Minolta A-mount lenses work without fault on the Sony bodies. Sony have
declared that compatibility with A-mount lenses is inherent in their alpha
line. Indeed, there is an adapter to take these lenses onto the NEX mount
as well as the new HD video cameras.

I'm not sure what your "sort out the prices" issue is with the two FF
bodies from Sony, but I suspect Sony will be coming out with a new FF in
the near future. This means lower prices on the a900/850 (maybe) and no
means of knowing what the new FF body will be priced at.

Along with all the lock in techniques above Sony are also good at the
following: -

1. Charging extra for locked in products - so FF SLR's are relatively very
expensive.
2. Charging more in the UK ("RoBbing" - only Yamaha are worse.

I suppose in defence Sony lovers might point out that unlike a lot of
companies Sony honour guarantees worldwide.


Don't top post.