 Dan C. |
Sigma lenses - incompatible?? I talked to a gentleman yesterday that owns a camera store and knows a lot about lenses. He told me that Sigma does not license with canon, nikon, etc. The problem, he said, is that current sigma lenses are compatible with current bodies, but that when a manufacturer such as canon or nikon releases a new body, upgrades an existing body, etc., the sigma lens may stop functioning. He said that 80% of the time the lens can be sent to sigma, and they will pop a new chip in, but of course you will have to pay for shipping and do without the lens for a few weeks. True? -Dan
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Michael H. Cothran |
Dan, I think your source is right on target, BUT...is misleading in leaving out an important piece of information: The same would hold true for ANY brand lens, including Nikon or Canon lenses - not just Sigma!!! Which makes the issue a moot point. Case in point - if you own a current production Nikon lens and Sigma lens today, that are fully functional on a current Nikon body, and tomorrow Nikon introduces an upgraded body with different electronics, etc, your current Nikon lens will not work any better or differently on the new body than your Sigma will. So while your camera-store-owner's information is somewhat true, he failed to include the rest of the information. Note - I have many older Nikkor lenses that do not function fully, or even at all on newer Nikon bodies. So don't isolate Sigma here - it's the same for any brand lens INCLUDING the manufacturer's own line. Michael H. Cothran
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Jon Close |
I have to disagree with Michael. With respect to Nikon, the older lenses lose function with the new body only when Nikon made a major change, like moving from apertures mechanically controlled by the camera to electronic control. That's not what happened when Canon introduced the Elan 7 or 20D (or Nikon the D200). Every Canon (or Nikon) EF series lens ever made is 100% compatible with the new cameras, but many Sigma lenses would lock-up the new camera, or could not adjust aperture. It wasn't anything that Canon (or Nikon) did, it is simply because Sigma did an incomplete job of backward engineering the electronic codes used in camera/lens communication. It is notable that these failures only happened with Sigma lenses. Tamron and Tokina lenses did not have these problems with new Canon (Nikon) bodies.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Michael H. Cothran |
Jon, Thanks for the correction. I was not aware that there was a specific problem with Sigma in this aspect. However, according to your statement, had Sigma done their homework, and built the lenses correctly, I do believe my response would then be valid, as it is with other (properly manufactured) lenses. Michael H. Cothran
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Dan C. |
Michael/Jon, hi. Thanks for the replies. I do not have knowledge that would allow me to join the discussion, only being able to pass on 3rd party info. However, what the gentleman told me is basically what Jon said in that the others licensed with manufacturers and sigma did not. As a person who has been programming computers for 30 years, I can tell you there is a world of difference between backward engineering and somebody handing you source code. Miss one subroutine out of a million, and your goose could be cooked. Besides, he also told me the new(?) Tamron DI II series of lenses were actually pretty darn good lenses, with some almost equal with original canon equipment but for tons le$$. Regards,
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Craig m. Zacarelli |
I dont know dan, I have a 350D and an Elan7 and an olde rebel xs and my siggie and tamron and canon lenses work great on all three bodies.. I think this cam shop guy is full of it! Yeah if this is true its only the first run of new lenses till they (enter any third party name here ) get ahold of one and "see what makes it tick" and makes the nessessary changes to their lines. Like I said, I have never heard of Sigmas not being compatible...ever. I suppose it could happen but chances are.... craig-
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Craig m. Zacarelli |
so I guess the moral of the story is.... Stay away from OLDER 3rd party lenses.. but honestly, I have never heard of this on any of the forums I have been a part of in the last 3 years. the only bad thing I heard of the sigmas was that they could be a bit "soft" and need re-calibration and then they are spot on. I have two, the 24-70 and the 10-20 and both are tack sharp and I love them. Craig-
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Jon Close |
Craig, it's not a blanket problem for Sigma lenses, just a select number of models made prior to 2001. It was a big deal back several years ago, but Sigma quickly corrected the problem in their current production lenses. See http://photonotes.org/articles/beginner-faq/lenses.html#compatibilitythirdparty,
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
Craig m. Zacarelli |
Ahhh, thats what I thought Jon, I know allot of people using Sigmas and have never heard of this. I mean ALLOT! I know of the soft focus, front / rear focus.. id bet it would be safe to say that Sigma makes some really nice lenses but maybe their Quality Control dept needs up grading. lol Thanks for the update Jon. Craig-
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
David Earls |
The picture below was taken by one of those Sigma lenses that "doesn't work." It's an old 500mm APO SLD lens I bought on eBay for well under $500. The lens only "works" with the camera with the aperture set to f5.6. AF is spotty at best. Learning how to focus manually is something we should all learn how to do anyway. When you focus manually, you get to select the focal point from the entire FOV; you're not limited to one of the camera's AF spots. If you've priced 500 primes lately, you see them starting around four grand. I was aware of the strenghts and limitations of the lens when I bought it, and to say I am thrilled with it is an understatement. This is about 10% of the original, blown up to 100%. This is the image straight out of the camera - no sharpening has been applied. You can even get a taste of the bokeh background. Here's the image; it should speak for itself.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
David Earls |
Should have mentioned - this was shot at a distance of about 15 feet.
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
This old forum is now archived. Use improved Forum here
Report this Thread |
||||||||