How do Sigma lenses stack up to Canon?

[Tallison]

I've recently decided to buy a Canon 20D and am comparing kit contents. Those that feature Sigma lenses with the same specifications as those with Canons are so much less expensive, I have to wonder: To what extent do you get what you pay for with Sigmas?

[Tallison]

1. Never mind, guys; I should have used the search feature first...

...to find the debate right here...http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=280&topic_id=9818

[Blue_In_AK]

2. I was going to mention

that I have the Sigma 10-20 mm which I really like, but I see that you've found the discussion we had about this a while ago, so I'll let you decide for yourself.

[bvar22]

3. I have a 30mm F/1.4 Sigma.

I am very happy with it. For the price, it can't be beat.
The autofocus is slightly slower than my Nikon lenses, but my pictures are pleasingly sharp.
This is the most fun lens I have. Takes GREAT available light pictures, especially around the house and in close quarters.


It is well built and well packaged, feels good on the camera, and takes great pics.
It comes with a lens hood (Canon will charge you $50-60) and a nice foam lined hard sided carrying case (hidden costs for the other providers).

I am going to buy another Sigma next....the 10-20mm.

[Tallison]

4. Dang, you can't find that speed in a zoom

which is too bad, because I'm a fan of fast lenses. Do you pretty much stick to fixed focal lengths?

After a couple months of excessive analysis, question asking, and mind changing, last night I wound up buying a Nikon D70 and a Turon 25-70, f/2.8 that those whose photography I really admire said they think would suit my beginning needs. I would up spending about $500 on the lens; the Nikon alternative would have cost about $1,400, and I just can't justify that at this point in my financial life, especially as such a neophyte photographer.

I'm not sure Sigma is even compatible with Nikon? It seems the only Sigmas I've seen are attached to Canon bodies...

[bvar22]

5. I hear ya!

I recently upgraded ta a Nikon DSLR, my first SLR of any type. I can relate to: "months of excessive analysis, question asking, and mind changing,". I wound up buying Nikon, but if it had been a different day, I could have bought Canon. At my level of experience, the differences are negligible. They will both take great pictures, and the options on these cameras exceed my ability to use them at least for now.

"the Nikon alternative would have cost about $1,400"
You are probably talking about the Nikon 70-200mm F/2.8 VR. & I agree. This lens is getting great reviews, and I would love one, but it is a bit pricey.
I have the 18-200mm VR which I use most of the time. It is a good lens and I am happy with it, but sometimes find myself wishing for the F2.8.


"I'm not sure Sigma is even compatible with Nikon?"
Sigma makes some lenses specifically for Nikon cameras. They are good lenses for the money. If you order one, or buy one online, make sure that "For Nikon" is specified. There are some minor AF problems with some lenses on some Nikons.
You can go here for the info:
https://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi/


"DANG, you can't find that speed in a zoom!"
I love the fast primes for several reasons:

*I don't care for FLASH photography, probably because I don't know how to do it properly. I prefer the softer, more natural exposures that a fast prime can give me where other lenses would require a flash....especially at indoor social situations. The prime is much less intrusive than a FLASH, and people tend to be more natural without the lights exploding in their faces. I also like nightime guerrilla street photos, and twilight time.

*The primes have less glass, and all other things being equal, the primes are sharper.

*They are smaller and lighter....easier to use in tight quarters, slightly less rude when pointed at someone.

*They offer wonderful creative opportunities with Depth of Field

*They are just more fun.

I have two:
Sigma 30mm F/1.4
Nikon 50mm F/1.8

The Nikon 50mm F/1.8 is small. It takes up very little space in the bag, and is inexpensive (about $100).
Everybody should have this lens.

I ordered the Sigma 10-20mm last week. I really didn't think I would need less than 18,mm, but I was wrong. Several times this Spring, I have needed something wider, so I went ahead with this lens. Several members of this forum have the Sigma, and it looks good.
I have actually postponed a trip until the Sigma arrives.

Congrats again, and welcome to the club. :party:
Here is a good forum for info on your camera and accessories, tips & tricks.
https://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi/


Looking forward to your pics!

[F.Gordon]

6. You didn't get the Canon?

:cry:

This place is being taken over by the Nikonians, but mark my words.... us Canonites will rise again someday and rule the Land of Pixie Dust.

... you'll have a lot of fun with your new camera. Just don't get frustrated.

Sigma? I don't think it matters much. You'll definitely go easier on the checkbook. I have one Sigma and the rest are Canon. I use it 80% of the time on my film body because it has more purple fringe than a The Artist Formerly Known as Prince concert. But with the software thingees they have now that really isn't an issue.

Biggest "complaint" I have is that the Sigma is slow to cycle through autofocus points and quite often it will "hunt" for something to focus on. Easy solution.... I just use manual focus.

Have fun with your new camera. Be sure to post a few snaps when you can.
:hi:

[Tallison]

7. Sounds like an ancient tribal rivalry!

The choice was tough. If I'd gone with Canon, I'd have gotten the 20D, which was several hundreds of dollars more expensive, which is hard to justify considering my amateur status. I looked at the Canon Rebel and felt like I could crush the body with my bare hands, it seemed so tiny and lightweight.

Wound up getting a Tamron F2.8 lens, which is probably slower to AF than the Nikkon, but not to any extent that bothers me since I have nothing to compare it to. Now the only problem will be financing a 150+mm zoom at the F2.8 speed, not to mention the added weight and "shake" it'll entail.

Over how much time did you develop your lens collection? :hi:

[F.Gordon]

8. A pretty silly rivalry

:silly:

IMO it's what ever you and your bank account are comfortable with.

Over how much time did you develop your lens collection?

About 15 minutes.
:rofl:

Actually, when I got the 20D I got the 18-55 lens that came with it and used that exclusively for about 3 months before I ever bought another lens. Wanted to figure out how to use the camera and decide what lenses I might want.

Again, have fun!!!!
:hi: