woof woof
I like a nice Chianti
- Messages
- 43,509
- Name
- Alan
- Edit My Images
- No
Several comments about Sigma lenses and other gear in various threads prompted me to post this. Maybe I'm right and maybe I'm wrong. Maybe you take a different view?
And not wishing to offend anyone here as this obviously isn't "us"...
I think Sigma woes are at least partly a myth as if they were as bad as people say I think they'd probably be in a financial mess. I think that there simply must be a percentage of people reporting problems because they've convinced themselves that they've got a front / back focusing / soft copy when in reality it's just gear hypochondria, unrealistic expectations or their own faulty technique.
In fact, I've seen this for myself when someone tried my 50mm f1.4 and declared it to be a front / back / focusing / soft pile of poo but in reality he was shooting at f1.4 and visibly either nodding forward or swaying back after focusing and as he took the shot. Twit. I got a good shot every time and he didn't and blamed the lens. Another guy complained that his 30mm f1.4 was soft and...he was shooting exclusively at f1.4. Ninny. He didn't seem to realise something as basic as the fact that at that aperture all the frame can't be sharp as some objects simply wont be the same distance from the camera as the object smack in the middle of the frame.
I'm sure that there are poor Sigma's about but I personally doubt that it's as bad as the internet and others would have us believe. I personally believe that a percentage of Sigma woes are simply internet panic.
It's not just Sigma of course, other manufacturers suffer to a greater or lesser degree. At the moment I think that Toyota would probably trade reputations with Sigma. Once this sort of thing starts it sometimes achieves it's own momentum. That's my theory anyway.
And not wishing to offend anyone here as this obviously isn't "us"...
I think Sigma woes are at least partly a myth as if they were as bad as people say I think they'd probably be in a financial mess. I think that there simply must be a percentage of people reporting problems because they've convinced themselves that they've got a front / back focusing / soft copy when in reality it's just gear hypochondria, unrealistic expectations or their own faulty technique.
In fact, I've seen this for myself when someone tried my 50mm f1.4 and declared it to be a front / back / focusing / soft pile of poo but in reality he was shooting at f1.4 and visibly either nodding forward or swaying back after focusing and as he took the shot. Twit. I got a good shot every time and he didn't and blamed the lens. Another guy complained that his 30mm f1.4 was soft and...he was shooting exclusively at f1.4. Ninny. He didn't seem to realise something as basic as the fact that at that aperture all the frame can't be sharp as some objects simply wont be the same distance from the camera as the object smack in the middle of the frame.
I'm sure that there are poor Sigma's about but I personally doubt that it's as bad as the internet and others would have us believe. I personally believe that a percentage of Sigma woes are simply internet panic.
It's not just Sigma of course, other manufacturers suffer to a greater or lesser degree. At the moment I think that Toyota would probably trade reputations with Sigma. Once this sort of thing starts it sometimes achieves it's own momentum. That's my theory anyway.
