01-12-2012, 12:23 PM
[quote name='wim' timestamp='1326323525' post='14772']
I am happy for you that you like the Sigma 14 so much.
My remark wasn't a blanket statement, it was purely referring to my own experiences, and YMMV. So far I have not yet encountered a Sigma that worked straight out of the box as it should, generally because of AF problems, with the exception of one: the 12-24 EX (the FF one). However, that had such bad corners and so much CA, I didn't keep it either.
Sigma are certainly upping the ante, and in itself the 50 F/1.4 is quite a good lens, but again, the ones I got all had AF problems (apart from some focus shift). I haven't tried the 85 yet.
[/quote]
As far as I remeber you have AF problem with your 50L also. It took several iterations before you’ve got 50L running. Just for curiosity I wonder witch way will be could be shorter. Getting Sigma 50/1,4 or canon 50L running as you want?
I’m asking this question not because I want to confront with you. I always appreciate your input. I have learned a lot from you the last 6 years.
I’m trying to avoid misleading of new PZ fellows – selectively saying that Canon Ls are flawless and superior to other brands can mislead people.
Ps: now I’m on the other size of barricade. I remember the time when you ware trying to convince the Zeiss brand believers that canon Ls are better than Zeiss.
[quote name='wim' timestamp='1326323525' post='14772']
To be very honest, I am well served by what I have currently, and I haven't seen anything recently that took my fancy, apart from some lenses I can't afford, and which I would use only sparingly anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />.
Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
I pretty much share the same.I have even more that I want from 10 to 300 mm At the end of the day who cares. What I have learned is that in photography there is no wrong way. If you are satisfied with equipment setup A doesn’t not mean that you will not be happy with setup B.
Happy shooting,
Miro
I am happy for you that you like the Sigma 14 so much.
My remark wasn't a blanket statement, it was purely referring to my own experiences, and YMMV. So far I have not yet encountered a Sigma that worked straight out of the box as it should, generally because of AF problems, with the exception of one: the 12-24 EX (the FF one). However, that had such bad corners and so much CA, I didn't keep it either.
Sigma are certainly upping the ante, and in itself the 50 F/1.4 is quite a good lens, but again, the ones I got all had AF problems (apart from some focus shift). I haven't tried the 85 yet.
[/quote]
As far as I remeber you have AF problem with your 50L also. It took several iterations before you’ve got 50L running. Just for curiosity I wonder witch way will be could be shorter. Getting Sigma 50/1,4 or canon 50L running as you want?
I’m asking this question not because I want to confront with you. I always appreciate your input. I have learned a lot from you the last 6 years.
I’m trying to avoid misleading of new PZ fellows – selectively saying that Canon Ls are flawless and superior to other brands can mislead people.
Ps: now I’m on the other size of barricade. I remember the time when you ware trying to convince the Zeiss brand believers that canon Ls are better than Zeiss.
[quote name='wim' timestamp='1326323525' post='14772']
To be very honest, I am well served by what I have currently, and I haven't seen anything recently that took my fancy, apart from some lenses I can't afford, and which I would use only sparingly anyway <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='
' />. Kind regards, Wim
[/quote]
I pretty much share the same.I have even more that I want from 10 to 300 mm At the end of the day who cares. What I have learned is that in photography there is no wrong way. If you are satisfied with equipment setup A doesn’t not mean that you will not be happy with setup B.
Happy shooting,
Miro