01-12-2012, 07:01 AM
[quote name='Rover' timestamp='1326344022' post='14781']
Oh, all right. It's just that neither me, nor anybody else I know who are/were using Sigma lenses have had any trouble with them so I see the amount of negativity as odd. I never had the 50 or 85 but tried both and the 85 is very good by f/1.8 (the 50 not as good, plus I don't need a 50mm lens really). I'm in a market for that 85 and a fast wideangle and since Canon's 24 is so expensive I might as well wait for Sigma to release their own.
Tokina also makes wonderful lenses sometimes; I just wish they did have USM of some sort. Ditto Tamron; for some unknown reason they only have it in one lens, albeit a good one (before I read up on Tamron 70-300 I used to think that all 7x-300 class lenses are bad).
[/quote]
The point is not the design - the Sigmas as well as Tokinas are mostly very fine here. The point is QC.
Oh, all right. It's just that neither me, nor anybody else I know who are/were using Sigma lenses have had any trouble with them so I see the amount of negativity as odd. I never had the 50 or 85 but tried both and the 85 is very good by f/1.8 (the 50 not as good, plus I don't need a 50mm lens really). I'm in a market for that 85 and a fast wideangle and since Canon's 24 is so expensive I might as well wait for Sigma to release their own.
Tokina also makes wonderful lenses sometimes; I just wish they did have USM of some sort. Ditto Tamron; for some unknown reason they only have it in one lens, albeit a good one (before I read up on Tamron 70-300 I used to think that all 7x-300 class lenses are bad).
[/quote]
The point is not the design - the Sigmas as well as Tokinas are mostly very fine here. The point is QC.