If you get what you pay for.... - DPChallenge Forums

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

01/03/2009 10:59:40 PM · #26

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

Oh, another thing: I've heard that the Non-Ex lenses seem a bit flimsier, but can't attest to this myself, although apparently "EX (EX Lens)
The exterior of this lens is EX-finished to denote the superior build and optical quality, and to enhance its appearance." How much of that is bluff is up to you. The EX build quality appears to be very solid, IMHO.

Just an FYI (you probably already know this) but from what I have been reading Sigma will now only be designating lenses with a fixed max aperture as EX. So any lens with a max aperture that is variable would not be included in the EX designation. I have the new 150-500 coming here - should arrive this coming Thursday (along with the 10-20). From what I have been reading it has the EX finish but not the EX designation dur to the variable max aperture.

Reviews have been all over the place from "love it" to "returned it". I'll be doing some extensive shooting, on tripod and off, at various FLs and apertures. Not shooting grids or charts but just real world photos under a variety of conditions. I'll be publishing the results on the net and will post a link when I am done. Will do the same with the 10-20. This will be on a Nikon D40 so you know if the reults are good on it, they will probably be better on a higher end camera.

spiritualspatula

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/03/2009 11:33:42 PM · #27

Originally posted by Canopic:

Had not heard this... thanks for the info. Does this mean they are built to lower quality than the former EX's, or just that the designation was reinvented? What does that do as far as warranty is concerned for these new lenses?

01/03/2009 11:55:30 PM · #28

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

A question. I though the Nikon 70-300 was an AF-S lens and so should focus with a D40, am I wrong? The Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S is the current version and goes for $449 (currently on special w/ free shipping from B&H). Is that the version you had?

I don't even see it on London Drugs' site, tho' that's where he got it. Trying to remember exactly (sick and don't have the energy to think or search)... it was ED, I recall, but not AF-S... Maybe the 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED ,which is discontinued?

brain...dead...will not work...need drugs...must sleeeeep..... :)

Message edited by author 2009-01-03 23:56:45.

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

01/04/2009 01:43:06 AM · #29

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

Originally posted by Canopic:

Just an FYI (you probably already know this) but from what I have been reading Sigma will now only be designating lenses with a fixed max aperture as EX. So any lens with a max aperture that is variable would not be included in the EX designation. I have the new 150-500 coming here - should arrive this coming Thursday (along with the 10-20). From what I have been reading it has the EX finish but not the EX designation dur to the variable max aperture.

Had not heard this... thanks for the info. Does this mean they are built to lower quality than the former EX's, or just that the designation was reinvented? What does that do as far as warranty is concerned for these new lenses?

Spiritual - I have to wonder if the first part of your question (re: quality of build) would ever actually be answered by Sigma beyond an assurance that Sigma insures excellent quality etc etc etc. (The general market hype). I have been reading some things about Sigma's warranty. Apparantly non-EX lenses have a 1 year warranty (assuming not grey market - grey market has no warranty from Sigma) while EX lenses have a total 4 year warranty.

Message edited by author 2009-01-04 01:43:54.

spiritualspatula

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/04/2009 01:47:46 AM · #30

Yeah, I knew about the warranty difference, hence my question... it seems that they would be decreasing their warranty greatly, which makes me inclined to thin that yes, the quality is going down. I'm not one to think Sigma would be so good as to tell us their products just got crappier... I was more asking if you had heard anything online in terms of real world examples of the new lenses, and specifically in regards to the "EX finish" without EX badging and if they were the same or lower quality.

01/04/2009 02:19:06 AM · #31

This has a 5 year warranty. Then again, that's just a Canadian one; the rest of the world gets 1 year.

Panasonic LUMIX DMC-LX100

01/04/2009 02:47:59 AM · #32

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

OK - get you. I honestly have not found even a consensus on the Sigma lenses I'm waiting on: the 150-500 or 10-20. "Hands on" reviews are all over the map. The 10-20 seems to fair overall better, but I would kind of expect that. Far less chance of user error as far as proper holding/grip or shutter speeds/aperture combinations than with the long zoom. I mean, with a 10-20, at 20mm a 1/60 shutter speed would be like a 1/1500 at 500mm, so I don't see a lot of stabilzation issues with the 10-20.

The 150-500 apparantly does have the EX finish without the EX badging. Most reviews tend to say the build itself is quite good: solid, smooth well placed controls etc. It is the definition at longer FLs (especially 400-500) that seems to be in question. I DID see one review where the person complained of and posted photos that had a kind of blurry smudgy affect in part of the pic. This reviewer tended to damn 150-500 based on this but those were the only shots out of hundreds I've seen that displayed this trait: so maybe a bad lens? Or something on the lens? Who knows? It is why I want to do some in-depth shooting and display the results.

ALso, with these lenses, I am keeping my photo editing software in mind. I will be posting straight shots but also basic edit shots with slight shifts in contrast, brightness, saturation, sharpness etc. if needed. To me the end result, post processing, is what I am most interested in: that is, what can I actually get out of the lens with the tolls at my disposal. Also very interetsed in the long zoom's OS and how well it really works. Again I see reviews all over the place. It is an interesting situation for me, still being new to the dslr world, and willl hopefully be quite educational.

I'm not expecting prime lens performance from these lenses. But I AM expecting at least "good" performance. We shall see.

Message edited by author 2009-01-04 02:53:20.

spiritualspatula

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

01/04/2009 03:26:09 AM · #33

I think you'll be happy with the 10-20. Part of what makes it "great" is that really, the problems that it has, are universal for the FL. Issues encountered with a big tele are not universal because they can be counteracted (though at a very expensive cost), so then you get people saying "well the 150-500 isn't as sharp as my Nikon 200-400 F4 even with a 1.4 TC." My response to that would be "no shit." Would I prefer the 200-400 to my Bigma? Of course, but sometimes being realistic is important, and that was one of those times for me.

Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM for Canon

01/04/2009 04:02:38 AM · #34

Originally posted by spiritualspatula:

Yes, I am really excieted about the 10-20. Such a wonderful presepctive. And I fully agree about the Sigma not being as sharp as the high priced spread. I, too would say "No crap!" Would not expect it to be. But my sense is it is better than I am anticipating.

Message edited by author 2009-01-04 04:03:47.

Ubersteiny

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

01/04/2009 12:07:12 PM · #35

Originally posted by BeeCee:

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

A question. I though the Nikon 70-300 was an AF-S lens and so should focus with a D40, am I wrong? The Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S is the current version and goes for $449 (currently on special w/ free shipping from B&H). Is that the version you had?

I don't even see it on London Drugs' site, tho' that's where he got it. Trying to remember exactly (sick and don't have the energy to think or search)... it was ED, I recall, but not AF-S... Maybe the 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED ,which is discontinued?

brain...dead...will not work...need drugs...must sleeeeep..... :)

the VR one that is being referred to is there. AFAIK when I worked there it was around $600

dd1989

Fujifilm x100

01/04/2009 01:23:46 PM · #36

Originally posted by Ann:

A few things to add....

I'm no fan of any 70-300. I think it is impossible for someone with mid-grade equipment to get good images consistently at 300 f/5.6, especially without VR. The physics just don't support it.

In this article, this company that does lens rentals posts their repair data. Sigma lenses don't come out so well. The other off brand lenses seem to do better.

I notice no Olympus/Zuiko lenses in that list ;) (yes they do rent them)

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

01/04/2009 01:42:34 PM · #37

Originally posted by noisemaker:

Originally posted by BeeCee:

Originally posted by jbsmithana:

A question. I though the Nikon 70-300 was an AF-S lens and so should focus with a D40, am I wrong? The Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S is the current version and goes for $449 (currently on special w/ free shipping from B&H). Is that the version you had?

I don't even see it on London Drugs' site, tho' that's where he got it. Trying to remember exactly (sick and don't have the energy to think or search)... it was ED, I recall, but not AF-S... Maybe the 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED ,which is discontinued?

brain...dead...will not work...need drugs...must sleeeeep..... :)

the VR one that is being referred to is there. AFAIK when I worked there it was around $600

That's what I mean... it's there but the one I got isn't, though they have it instore. Mine was $349 and the Sigma was $219.

Ann

Olympus OM-D E-M1

01/04/2009 03:40:49 PM · #38

Originally posted by dd1989:

Originally posted by Ann:

In this article, this company that does lens rentals posts their repair data. Sigma lenses don't come out so well. The other off brand lenses seem to do better.

I notice no Olympus/Zuiko lenses in that list ;) (yes they do rent them)

They didn't post data on any lens they had less than 10 copies of. I doubt they have many copies of the Olympus/Zuiko lenses.

dd1989

Fujifilm x100

01/06/2009 02:06:39 AM · #39

Originally posted by Ann:

Originally posted by dd1989:

Originally posted by Ann:

In this article, this company that does lens rentals posts their repair data. Sigma lenses don't come out so well. The other off brand lenses seem to do better.

I notice no Olympus/Zuiko lenses in that list ;) (yes they do rent them)

They didn't post data on any lens they had less than 10 copies of. I doubt they have many copies of the Olympus/Zuiko lenses.

I think they're just brilliant haha.

01/12/2009 08:04:53 PM · #40

Well I have been doing some test shots with the 150-500 especially. First impressions: It is big, all right, and a bit heavy (I knew the specs going in). But actually it was quite hand holdable and comfortable - and I have smallish hands. Unfortunately, at least my copy, was just not sharp. Horribly unsharp for most of the shots, even manually focussing on a tripod with OS off (as well as on a tripod using auto-focus). Speaking of OS - it seems effective using both OS1 for camera shake and OS2 for panning. And focussing was surprisingly fast. But I did not get a single image I would call sharp. Maybe I just got a bad sample, but no shot began to approach the sharpness of some sample images I've seen on the internet. Aperture did not seem to make a tremendous difference. I have some shots at F5.6 and some at 8, 11 and 16. Did not seem to make much difference.

Money IS a factor so I have to forego the 2.8 teles/tele zooms. (well - maybe - one does only live once - so they say.)

The 10-20mm is a joy. I am still playing with it but it produces lovely images and the architectural distortion is less than I was anticipating.

Oh - I tried this on both my Nikon D40 (fully compatible)and a friends Nikon D90 with equal results. I really, really liked the D90 so - well - today I bought one. What to do?

Message edited by author 2009-01-12 20:49:29.

01/13/2009 02:56:32 PM · #41

*note to self* Do not borrow friends' cameras until after lottery win.

Thanks for the comments on the lens, though :)

Tamron SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 Di II LD Aspherical (IF) for Nikon

01/13/2009 08:34:59 PM · #42

I had a lottery ticket for that night. Not sure WHAT went wrong there! ::sigh::

The 10-20 continues to prove itself. It dawned on me it is an EX lens. I have to say the feel and build quality really are excellent. I'll be putting some shots in my currently empty portfolio taken with the 10-20.

gwsallen

Nikon D300

01/15/2009 10:38:39 PM · #43

My experience with Third party lense - Tamron. Shutter blade not perfectly align - view my shots here //allengong.blogspot.com/

Auto focus speed not as fast as kit lens i used to have.

Sharpness also not as good as kit lens.

My next lens or future lens will all be Nikkor definitely.

Spend more for better quality.

Message edited by author 2009-01-15 22:39:03.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

01/19/2009 08:11:55 PM · #44

Okay, you guys were right. I had my first chance to give the lens a good test yesterday, in optimal conditions. I took it back today. I'll post a sample in a bit if my computer will behave long enough.

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

01/19/2009 08:49:22 PM · #45

Just my opinion, but I have had enough grief, have listened to enough other grumblings, and having just gotten a vicious slap in the face in the way of an estimate from Tamron, that I emphatically will never again buy a third party lens.

PhotoDave

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

01/19/2009 08:56:50 PM · #46

Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Canon isnt much different, earlier last year I went to my local camera store took MY 40D in to the store to try a couple lenses out and after 3 different sigmas errored on me. that pretty much convinced me to stick to Canon. I know some people have great luck with them but given what happened in the store with 3 different NEW lenses that kinda put me off of them...

togtog

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

01/19/2009 09:08:55 PM · #47

Since this is at the top again. One thing to note about third party lenses is they need to reverse engineer the circuits to communicate with the camera, which means at some point in the future Canon or Nikon may make a subtle change to their communication protocol which will break some third party lenses. So you shouldn't count on using them on future cameras. From what I have heard this has happened a few times, sometimes Sigma, Tamron etc. will offer updated circuits, sometimes not.