Would'nt recomend sigma lens

[hotspur]

Just a quick note that may be usefull to ice in space readers,it cost me

alot to learn it,I recently bought a canon 450D D/SLR,it is lovely,i spent

over $1100 on a sigma 120 to 400mm lens,and well what a disaster!the

lens had many issues,didnt focus quickly,OS was slow.

I felt it was a "dud" and promptly returned it to retailer,only to be told

this is how it functions,and i wasnt entitled to a full exchange,i have

lost a considerable amount in only one week.Those contemplating buying

any sigma lens,think carefully!,if you own a Nikon,canon,pentax etc and used

it manufatureres lenses,stick to them,dont try and save money on

a "cheaper"lens, otherwise you will end up disappointed,and out of

pocket.

regards Chris:(

[dpastern]

Oh please. Maybe you got a dud, maybe your expectations are unreasonable, maybe you don't know how to use the lens, who knows.

A few things - Canon's prosumer DSLRs are NOT reknowned for fast AF, especially the cheaper ones. The 450D does NOT have fast AF. Nor accurate. I've been using Canon's for 20 years, I have a 1D Mark IIn and D60 (great grand daddy of your 450D) and there is a marked difference in performance between the 2 cameras. The next time you're in Brissie, PM me and I'll be only too happy to meet up and let you have a spin with your lens on my Mark IIn. That'll sort the boys from the girls out I suspect, and might make you feel a bit better about the lens.

A few things - the lens is a slow lens - min. f stop is f4.5. That doesn't let much light in, which means the AF sensor has less to work with. There's a reason why pros pay for super fast pro lenses! You pays for what you get.

Also - Sigma makes some mighty fine lenses. I own a Sigma 150mm f2.8 EX APO Macro lens, and it's a winner. Equals Canon's much more expensive 180mm f3.5 L macro lens imho. Do a bit of reading on the net and you'll find MANY happy Sigma users. My macro mate LordV (Google him) uses a Sigma macro lens (as well as a dedicated 1x-5x Canon MPE-65 unit) and his Sigma images are wonderful. Hell, all his images are.

One final thing - know your consumer rights. If you are not satisfied with the unit, the dealer MUST address it, not fob you off. Get their postal address, send them a letter via registered post (signature required), demanding a response within 14 days or you'll take it to your local Fair Trading.

http://www.accc.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/3863

Also, for your interest, a review on the lens you bought:

http://www.popphoto.com/Reviews/Lenses/Sigma-120-400mm-f-4.5-5.6-DG-OS-HSM-Lens-Test

I don't mean to belittle you, but I find most people who are new to photography don't know enough to know what's a reasonable expectation, and what isn't.

Dave

[dugnsuz]

Re the slow autofocus of the lens...
Try changing the way your DSLR autofocuses - instead of using the 9 point AF function (not sure if the 450D is the same as my 40D?), change to a central single AF point. This means the lens will focus on the object in the centre of your viewfinder not an object on the periphery. This may help - I recently bought a Canon 300mm f4L lens which seemed really soft when I tested it out of the box and found that this method sorted out the problem...when focusing to infinity, the camera/lens would pick a point in the foreground to AF on making the object at infinity very soft!!!

Sorry to hear of your bad experience, especially when you've forked out a wad of cash! But, I think you should take a deep breath and give the lens another go:)
Hope it works out for you Chris
All the best
Doug:thumbsup:

[Octane]

You might want to edit your post.

A guy on another forum recently got taken to the cleaners for defaming a brand name. Especially considering the problem was not with the lens.

It essentially comes down to "you get what you pay for". I had similar issues with a 75-300mm lens, and it was annoying, to say the least.

David is 100% correct in his assertion that the prosumer bodies have superior focus systems, and that an f/4.5-f/5.6 lens is going to struggle with focus on the long end. The resulting images will be soft, especially handheld.

Regards,
Humayun

[dpastern]

Excellent point Doug re: central focus point. BTW, I also have a 300mm f4 IS L (one of my many lenses) and it is a bit soft too. My fault for not testing it properly when I originally bought it many years ago. The original non IS is a better lens, sharper too btw. Artie Morris (famous bird photography, http://www.birdsasart.com/) does talk highly of both the 300mm f4 non IS and 400mm f5.6.

Thanks Humayun for the kind words :-)

Perhaps Chris got a dud lens, it does happen. I'd like to see the lens in action before judging it. Many retailers do tend to fob you off when you report a problem, rather than provide quality customer service and assist the customer.

One thing I meant to mention in my original post - did you buy from an authorised Australian dealer? From memory, Sigma lenses are distributed by CR Kennedy in Australia. There are many online places that sell Sigma lenses, but they are NOT authorised Australian resellers. They do NOT carry an Australian backed warranty. You are at the MERCY of the retailer when it comes to warranty issues. True, that retailer must provide full warranty as per the Trade Practices Act 1974 legislation, but that won't stop many of them from trying to avoid their obligations.

Good luck, and as I said earlier, the offer stands for trying your new lens out on my Mark IIn. Hell, I'll bring my 70-200 f2.8 along and you can try that on your 450D ;-)

Dave

PS Humayun you have a very nice lens selection I just realised ;-)

[matt]

H -

As far as I understand these things, Chris is not going to be sued for offering an opinion on the performance of an item he has purchased.

He's entitled to his opinion, whether it's particularly informed or not.

It constitutes a review.

He'd only be in trouble if he said something along the lines of he'd been deliberately ripped off or accused the company of fraudulent or deceptive behaviour.

[dpastern]

Agreed, but let's focus on helping Chris out (as best as possible), with his problem.

Dave

[matt]

Indeed...

Just delivering a point of clarification...

And I believe he's been receiving plenty of help through this post. So keep it going, folks:)

[AlexN]

I've had quite a good run of Sigma lenses myself.. My 10-20 was a little funky.. but thats what I get for not spending the extra $300 on the Canon 10-22 USM..

All the other sigma's I've had,
24-60mm F/2.8 (Canon)
70-200mm F/2.8 (Nikon)
170-500mm F/3.5~5.6 (Canon)
300mm F/2.8 (Nikon)
Have been flawless.. All very fast to focus, the difference in image quality compared to the Canon/Nikon equivalent was barely distinguishable..

I think maybe you were expecting more for your money, or perhaps you placed too much stock in reviews you had read, without going into a store and having a test of the lens in question.. Thats always the best way in my opinion...

[matt]

Although this would appear to be Round 2 of this particular 'vent'

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=47426

[Octane]

Cheers for the clarification, Matt and Dave.

The dude on the other forum did specifically bag/defame the brand, and also bashed the product.

They (the company in question) were probably more concerned with the brand bashing rather than the product review, as it were. :)

Regards,
Humayun

[h0ughy]

I have a 50-500 sigma lens that I use with my pentax k10D, and a few other sigma lenses. I did do my homework before i bought and they offered me value for money - fully knowing they were slow to focus and could be soft on occasions. but overall many of my photos are taken with sigma lenses, and canon ones as well, but with those all i bought were L lenses.

the overall point is buyer beware, but you do have consumer laws to help protect you with sales and product defect or performance, but you cant legislate laws for preconceived performances

[netwolf]

My experience with SLR/DSLR is limited to my 400D camera and twin lens kit i got with it. I spent what i could afford to and got the performance i paid for. Still i have used the web to gain information on how to get the best out of the lens's i have.

Also when dealing with warranty returns, its never straightforward. A warranty replacement is not usually given if the product is performing as per specs. While we may 'feel' its not good its not a sufficent to get a replacement on this. You need to make sure you dont come of sounding to the retailer as though it is a change of mind return. I have returned and had replaced many items from Shoes to computer parts, its a matter of approach. It is unfortunate but with some retailers you must be a little tac full in your approach. Might also help to take a friend who really understandts lens well and can explain the problems as problems.
You say
1. Focus is slows, retailer can argue this is a shortcomming of your body rather than the lens. Or this is the normal operation of this lens.
2. OS is slow again the can say its within spec. Or a result of the combination of the 450d body with this lens.

You need to quantify the problem and perhaps request the trial of another lesn in the shop to see if it perfrorms 'quantafiably' better.
Dont leave room for the retailer to think you are simply nit picking or have had a change of mind. Do you research see what others have said about the same lens and body combo and then present case to the retailer.

Working in IT i deal a lot with users who think the problem is with the box, even though you might replace everyithing in it. It is crtical to listen to what the user is saying and seperate the emotions from the facts. People no doubt get very frustrated when there peers and mangers are hounding them for work and there computer just wont cooperate with them. In such situations its very challengint to get the facts, so experiance and research help to seperate fact from fiction.

Often my friends call me first before they go to the shop for warranty repair on ther computers, just to ensure they present the facts to get what they need done. Similarly you need to do your homework, either by calling a friend who knows camera's or by reaching out to people on the forums first before approaching the retailer.


Might i also suggest perhaps you try the lens on a 40D or 50D camera and see if it operates diffrently, surely the place you purchased it from can at the lease permit you to do this test. As others have suggested it may perform better on a pro body.

[dpastern]

Everyone vents from time to time, it's perfectly normal. Hell, glad you guys didn't here my vents about Canon. I presume OS means operational speed?

I note in the original post by Chris, he's made comparison to a Canon 100-400, which I presume is the L variant. That's a lens cost 3-4 times the amount of money, it's a pro grade lens. I haven't used one, but it has a good rep. Not a fair comparison Chris.

Can you please specfically state what you're not happy with, and post an example image so we can see and help you?

Dave

[troypiggo]

Not sure if you already are, but if you're a Canon user I would strongly recommend joining the POTN forum (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/). It's almost a must for learning about your gear, reviews of gear, getting help using it, getting opinions on what lenses to buy etc. Not just lenses - bodies, flash, tripods, other accessories. Also posting images and critiquing for improvement. Very similar setup and use to this wonderful forum, and the mood is most friendly. Can't recommend it highly enough. (Dave, I know your view on POTN is somewhat different, but I'll stand by what I say above for Chris' situation ;) )

Sigma do make great lenses. Sorry to hear about your bad experience. I'll echo the advice of others above.

There are plenty of "dud" Canon lenses out there too, and Tamron, and Tokina.

Whenever I'm contemplating a new lens purchase, I trawl POTN and dpreview for reviews and comments on them. You will get good and bad reviews on anything.

PS - Dave, "OS" is Sigma's equivalent of IS (image stabilisation)

[iceman]

I love my Sigma 17-70mm. Great lens for the price.

[hotspur]

Thank you all who have given some feed back on this issue,

some of it has been quite usefull,

But whats this about me being sued for making the orginal comment??

[matt]

I've answered that...but won't say any more or David will instruct us to get back to your original question!:lol:

I hope some of it was "quite usefull" (sic)

[rally]

Chris,

I can appreciate your frustration - however . . .

I replied to your earlier posted complaint about the lens and made some suggestions and asked you to submit an image so that we could collectively look at it, by looking at the EXIF info and the image we would be able to determine if there were some basic problems.

However you chose not to do that but rather create a new post with a blanket statement that Sigma lenses are rubbish.

That is utter nonsense.

At no point have you actually described the problem with any particular image.

I along with many 1,000's of others own sigma lenses that perfrom superbly, I also many Pro lenses and lenses of varying IQ.
Some of the Sigmas are equal in many respects to my Pro lenses and some of them are not.
The price differences are enormous and a little research and evaluation will immediately determine which lenses are in which class.
Sigma along with all the major lens manufacturers produces different classes of lenses.

Whilst every lens maker has had examples of lenses that somehow made it through quality control when they shouldn't have and Sigma is no exception, the fact that the dealer has said your lens is not faulty seems to indicate to me that the issues you are describing are either an issue with your perception on how lens should work, lack of experience with this particular lens and lack of experience using lenses with these sorts of longer focal lengths.

If you have closed your eyes to these possibilities then you are quite likely to end up missing out on the photographic opportunities that this lens can provide you. If in fact it is a faulty lens, then you have missed out on the opportunity to more accurately identify its problems and resolve them.

I dont think bagging a lens manufacturer because you have a problem or perceived problem without justification or example is the best way to resolve your issue or the best use of the collective help this forum can provide you.

Rally

[dpastern]

:P I was just trying to be a good boy (for once) lol!!!

Dave

[matt]

Anyway.... enough of that.

let's focus on helping Chris out (as best as possible), with his problem. :P:lol:

[hotspur]

Thank you all for your comments,i did not mean to upset anyone,but,yes

it was my fault for purchasing equipment that was'nt to the level of

what i am used too.I should have known better,and just bought top

Japanese equipment.

As a foot note,i was able to exchange lens,and my stress levels are heading back to normal.

I have tried to post some pics,but having difficulty with attachments.i will continue to try.

Some have said i havent stated exact problem,here it is

1,when i looked through viewfinder and was about to take pic,the button

half way down the image in view finder would jump wildly and erratically.

when OS (optical stabilizer) was on.After using canon and nikon etc,

i was not used to this been "normal",some might not have a problem with

this,but i was not going to have a jumpy horse in my stable.

thanks for your helpfull comments again

[Omaroo]

Sigma are made in Japan in the delightful Aizu-Wakamatsu City, Fukushima, where there is a rather good university and is also the old-world laquer centre of Japan.

(I have no say in the lenses - I've never bought one and I'm a Nikkor user... )

[multiweb]

Careful - IMHO I don't think you can risk posting comments like this about brands. Taking it with the supplier is fine but you might get in trouble (your a** sued) as this is a public forum. :whistle:

[dpastern]

Well, I highly doubt that Sigma would have a case to stand on. Judges look at if your content was factual. If you have evidence to back your case, you're quite entitled to state it. If a manufacturer doesn't like it, tough luck. When manufacturers try and sue for things like this, it makes a mockery of the legal system, since the legal system is NOT equal. Those with more money (i.e. the rich and powerful) are automatically given preferential treatment by the legal process. Many people choose to settle, rather than risk paying for expensive legal support. Supporting yourself legally is risky, and in some jurisdictions, judges heavily frown upon it. I find manufacturers who take legal action against people who speak their mind nothing more than bullyism taken to extremes. A point in example of this:

http://thomashawk.com/2009/02/canon-has-no-sense-of-humor-tries-to-shut-down-fake-chuck-westfall-blog.html

And the best thing, Canon *lost*. Hooray for the little man.

Dave

[citivolus]

I've had the good and the bad from Sigma, and I learned that you get what you pay for. Back when I bought my first Canon SLR, I had a Sigma 135-400. I thought a lot of that lens in my blissful ignorance, until I bought some decent lenses and realised just how soft it was. Well, what did I expect from a lens with that kind of focal range? It wasn't really any worse than the 28-135mm Canon, but then, they were both bottom of the range as far as optical quality, but considering the price, well...

Later on I bought a used Sigma 300mm f/2.8 which I would still have had it been compatible with DSLRs (exceptional lens for the period), as well as a 15-30mm aspheric. The 15-30 is a great lens for the money, and I still have it. Not blazing fast at auto focus, not the quietest lens, but it does a good job at what it was designed for.

Anyway, what am I trying to say? Just like Canon or any other major camera manufacturer, Sigma has products that target different tiers in the market. I am now very careful about checking consumer reviews and actual performance specs before buying any lens, and if a lens with a good reputation under-performs after all this, you can bet the manufacturer and dealer will be hearing from me with an "opportunity" for them to put things right.

[KenGee]

Sigma are very helpful they put a nice ring around their lens. Have a look at the colour, all lens are made to a price point. As for the notanikonorcanon people it's amazing how much a lens can be improved by the brand badge that is stuck on it in the factory.
Got a friend who works in a bakery they lable their white sliced bread with 16 different brands.

[dpastern]

If you're saying Sigma makes Canon or Nikon lenses you are wrong Ken. They do not come out of the same factory, not even the cheap lenses. AFAIK, Canon has never outsourced its lenses, not even the cheap ones. Up until very recently, all Canon lenses were made in Japan. Now the cheap ones are made outside of Japan, but the L series units are still made in Japan.

Sigma makes some very good lenses - I use a Sigma 150mm f2.8 EX APO Macro lens and it takes wonderful images, every bit as good as the Canon 180mm f3.5 L imho. AF is generally within 95% of Canon's AF performance too. The advent of HSM means that they also compete with Canon & Nikon on USM grounds (silent ultrasonic wave drives).

AFAIK, Canon is the only lens manufacturer to make lenses with flourite elements. Others tried, and gave up on the process. Canon's long L series lenses are very very good, and Sigma comes close, but does not entirely match them peformance wise (the same with Tokina and Tamron). Still, Sigma (and others) lenses are cheaper than what Canon/Nikon offer.

Dave

[dugnsuz]

Each brand has some jewels and some turds!

Check out a number of reviews, expert and anecdotal (get a consensus) and/or "try before you buy".

Simple...No!?

Doug

[Omaroo]

:thumbsup: As long as this wasn't meant to read: "Others tried, failed, and gave up on the process."

As far as I know, Nikon developed ED glass early on because they were of the opinion that CaFl was just too fragile for a pro lens that'd be subjected to the knocks and poor treatment they inevitably get in the field. Visiting them often, I sit down in the foyer of News Ltd or Fairfax in Sydney or Melbourne for half an hour on any day of the week, and watch the photo boys and gals walk through the turnstiles with two or three complete cameras slung around their necks - and see them clunking together as they stride. It's rather obvious that the company pays for them. LOL!

[DavidU]

Shudder:scared2:

[AlexN]

I once saw a reporter lay a Canon 1Dmk3 with a 600mm F/4L lens with its mono-pod in the dirt, then pick up his second 1dmk3 + 300 F/2.8L from out of the dirt beside him to get a wider field of view at the V8's... I nearly lost my lunch... Pro gear definitely gets a beating...

[Paul Haese]

I have had a fairly good read through this thread although not totally comprehensive.

Just a few observation that might have slipped past the radar.

When buying lens, anything that has f4.5-5.6 is going to be slow at focus. I have a 80-400 f5.6 Nikon and it can be a dog when I want fast focus. That is even when using it with my D3.

For future use you should look at lenses that are f2.8 if you want fast focus and response. These lenses of course cost a lot of money. The f5.6 lens cost a lot less. A slow focusing lenses is not crap, it is just more budget related.

Sigma like Nikon, Canon and Tameron make fast and slow lenses. If you buy a zoom you are assured that they are not a master of any focal length and are in fact a compromise. There are fast zooms but again they cost a lot of money. To be honest only spending a K or so is never going to assure you of getting a fast lens. Your only mistake was to buy without seeing how fast the lens was. Many photographic retailers will let you mount the lens on your camera and try it before buying.

Added to this is that you have a prosumer body. Pro bodies make slower lenses faster in response, but virtue of the features the pro body has. They don't make them into a silk purse but they seem better than owning a sows ear. Prosumer bodies are like slow f ratio lenses. They are budget related to allow the average punter the ability to enter the market.

Sigma is not at fault here. You made the mistake without finding out first. I am sure the lens is fine, you might have to assess what you are going to use it for now. Good work can be done with slower lens, just try to find its strengths.:) This has always worked for me. Take a look at my Earth section in website in my sig. Many of the shots are taken with slow lenses.

[dpastern]

Just to come to Chris' defence - the problem was not so much AF, but that when he focused, the whole OS/IS (whatever you want to call it) function would make the entire image shudder in the viewfinder. That is NOT normal behaviour. Whether it's a cheap or expensive lens, the OS/IS doing that isn't right.

You've made good points Chris, although the slowness of the lens/AF speed was mentioned (by myself and others earlier on in the thread).

Dave

[hotspur]

yes,the main issues the lens had was that the image would jump

around violently in view finder,when the button was half pressed down,

it would move irratically,Some people mind find this acceptable,i dont,

and didnt and sent the lens back,i have since swaped the lens for

a canon 70 to 300mm,(see pics in terestrial subjects,tittled "birds with

new lens" by hotspur.NOW i could not get images any where near those

with that sigma thing,i could get some resonable images when in manual

focus with no IS or OS as sigma call it.the images i got in sports mode

were a joke,i paid well over a K,and was not happy.the lens had a number of other issues too.

I am becoming a bit tiresome of this thread,and have moved on,and

am currently happy with the above canon lens,and will be purchasing

a canon 70 to 200mm non IS F2.8 soon,I really just wanted people

to be aware that sigma lens may not be what they hope.

THE END

[Peter Ward]

Humm...I've found Sigma lenses vary quite a bit in quality, but its often a case of doing a little homework before you buy (there are plenty of lens reviews on the internet).

For example, Sigma's 300mm F2.8 is really very good when you drop a UV/IR filter in its filter bay.

http://www.atscope.com.au/widefield/m16m17hXp.jpg

Their 70-200 F2.8 zoom is also excellent and rivals Canon's L series glass in the same FL.