05-17-2011, 01:35 AM
[quote name='mst' timestamp='1305587983' post='8384']
Technically excellent ... but had to go through 4 copies for this review, and none was flawless.
[/quote]
I'd love to pay $200 more for this lens as long as Sigma could do better on their QC... I think Sigma has already built up a quite complete product line supplemented by some unique lenses like this 8-16, and several fast super tele zoom. Maybe it is about the time for Sigma to slow down a little bit on new lens development and spare some time to improve their QC. After all the 200-500/2.8 might be eye catching, but 99% of the users still care more about lenses like 8-16, 24-70, 70-200 and those f1.4 lenses. The QC might be a main concern for a lot of hostile buyers, especially when online shopping are so handy today...
Technically excellent ... but had to go through 4 copies for this review, and none was flawless.
[/quote]
I'd love to pay $200 more for this lens as long as Sigma could do better on their QC... I think Sigma has already built up a quite complete product line supplemented by some unique lenses like this 8-16, and several fast super tele zoom. Maybe it is about the time for Sigma to slow down a little bit on new lens development and spare some time to improve their QC. After all the 200-500/2.8 might be eye catching, but 99% of the users still care more about lenses like 8-16, 24-70, 70-200 and those f1.4 lenses. The QC might be a main concern for a lot of hostile buyers, especially when online shopping are so handy today...