Lenses - Brand or Other Make

[Gremlin]

With the better weather approaching, I decided I need a general walkabout lens to cut down of the gear I carry around when
I go to various country shows etc.
So I popped into Park Cameras with a view to buying a 18-200 zoom, I alrady have all lengths from 12mm up to 400mm in various
zooms and fixed focal lenses, just need a good all rounder for carrying around.
As ever nothing in stock, but they do have the Tamron/Sigma versions, Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Thanks.
This is no disrespecr on the lenses and I know they can produce some very sharp images, but as I have said before, my gear is bought to
be used not wrapped in cottonwool, and my past experiences with other brands is that they are far less robust then the
Nikon versions, had a couple of Sigmas fail on the first knock
Just wondered what others experiences are.
BTW I bought a Nikon 18/300, seems ok so far, only been out for a quick test

 

[Nod]

Had an 18-270 Tamron which worked fine on the D70 but didn't AF on the V1. Chopped it in against the 18-200 Nikkor which does work on the V1 but lacks the ultimate reach. The 70-300 VR Nikkor covers the long end on all the Nikon kit and feels much better than either the earlier (pre VR) Nikkor or the APO Sigma I had an extended play with. Not had any problems with assorted Sigmas and Tamrons other than the weight of the f/2.8 lenses. Still got Sigma 8mm and 12-24.

 

[Craig20264]

Dropped my camera from 5 feet onto concrete with Nikkor 35mm attached. Lens hood took the full brunt. Skidded along the floor for a further 3 feet. Few scratches and everything works fine. (Apart from my heart, it's still in my mouth!)

 

[Gremlin]

Dropped my camera from 5 feet onto concrete with Nikkor 35mm attached. Lens hood took the full brunt. Skidded along the floor for a further 3 feet. Few scratches and everything works fine. (Apart from my heart, it's still in my mouth!)

Did similar with a 70-200 attached,, lens hood totally kaput, camera and lens still working fine a couple of years later.

Sigma 150-500 fell a few inches out of car, AF stopped working, sigma 105 macro knocked and af stopped working, luckily still under warranty

 

[snerkler]

Has several sigmas and a Tamron and never had issues, although to date none have had any drops or misuse.

 

[odd jim]

With the better weather approaching, I decided I need a general walkabout lens to cut down of the gear I carry around when
I go to various country shows etc.
So I popped into Park Cameras with a view to buying a 18-200 zoom, I alrady have all lengths from 12mm up to 400mm in various
zooms and fixed focal lenses, just need a good all rounder for carrying around.
As ever nothing in stock, but they do have the Tamron/Sigma versions, Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Thanks.
This is no disrespecr on the lenses and I know they can produce some very sharp images, but as I have said before, my gear is bought to
be used not wrapped in cottonwool, and my past experiences with other brands is that they are far less robust then the
Nikon versions, had a couple of Sigmas fail on the first knock
Just wondered what others experiences are.
BTW I bought a Nikon 18/300, seems ok so far, only been out for a quick test

Don't ignore third party brands - Sigma make some of the best lenses out there.

 

[odd jim]

Did similar with a 70-200 attached,, lens hood totally kaput, camera and lens still working fine a couple of years later.

Sigma 150-500 fell a few inches out of car, AF stopped working, sigma 105 macro knocked and af stopped working, luckily still under warranty

If you drop any lens you're guaranteed issues - don't let the fact the 70-200 was relatively undamaged make you think otherwise, you were lucky!

 

[Gremlin]

Don't ignore third party brands - Sigma make some of the best lenses out there.

In your opinion, I've owned 4 and had problems with every one of them, so never again, but that is just my experience

If you drop any lens you're guaranteed issues - don't let the fact the 70-200 was relatively undamaged make you think otherwise, you were lucky!

Not true, I did that a few years back, attached to my old D300, still works fine, with a brand new Nikon hood on it, as I said my gear is there to be used and abused, not just for show,
out in all weathers, never had a problem with any of it.
I do have a sigma ringflash, but only because Nikon don't do a simple one, that's pretty good

 

[odd jim]

In your opinion, I've owned 4 and had problems with every one of them, so never again, but that is just my experience



Not true, I did that a few years back, attached to my old D300, still works fine, with a brand new Nikon hood on it, as I said my gear is there to be used and abused, not just for show,
out in all weathers, never had a problem with any of it.
I do have a sigma ringflash, but only because Nikon don't do a simple one, that's pretty good

I don't think it's just my opinion, their art lenses are rated right up there with the best of them, and their 105mm OS macro is sublime

I'm also really enjoying the 150-600 c, but that's by the by.

 

[Gremlin]

I don't think it's just my opinion, their art lenses are rated right up there with the best of them, and their 105mm OS macro is sublime

I'm also really enjoying the 150-600 c, but that's by the by.

Never got on with the 105macro and it stopped focusing after 3 months, repaired under warranty, but I changed to Nikon version and love it.
As I said I don't dispute how sharp etc they are, it's the build quality that lets them down for me.

 

[Bobsyeruncle]

I don't think it's just my opinion, their art lenses are rated right up there with the best of them, and their 105mm OS macro is sublime

I'm also really enjoying the 150-600 c, but that's by the by.

My opinion too. I have a 17-50 2.8, 105 macro and 150-600
Sold my nikkors.

 

[Phil V]

I have a couple of Sigma lenses that are as well built as any of my L glass, they also produce great images.

It's not about brand, it's about a price point. And a cheap lens is a cheap lens whether it says Canon, Nikon, Tamron or Sigma on it. And a quality lens is the same too.

But am I the only person staring at the irony of someone buying a s*** superzoom looking down on other people's photography gear

I'd put my Sigma 35mm Art against that Nikon superzoom, by every measure. Happy to discuss.

 

[Gremlin]

With the better weather approaching, I decided I need a general walkabout lens to cut down of the gear I carry around when
I go to various country shows etc.

This is no disrespecr on the lenses and I know they can produce some very sharp images, but as I have said before, my gear is bought to
be used not wrapped in cottonwool, and my past experiences with other brands is that they are far less robust then the
Nikon versions, had a couple of Sigmas fail on the first knock
Just wondered what others experiences are.

Did I say I was looking down at other peoples choices, just asked for experiences they have had with the lenses build.
Also as stated I have a lot of very good expensive lenses, just want an all rounder for snaps etc and I don't want to carry around loads of heavy gear
all day just for candid shots, take it you haven't had any problems when dropping/knocking your sigmas etc. ?

 

[snerkler]

Never got on with the 105macro and it stopped focusing after 3 months, repaired under warranty, but I changed to Nikon version and love it.
As I said I don't dispute how sharp etc they are, it's the build quality that lets them down for me.

Just to give a different slant on things

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...up-with-nikon-zoom-lens-build-quality.624919/

And I'm a Nikon user so not a Nikon basher

Tbh I wouldn't expect any of my lenses, Nikon, Tamron or Sigma to survive being dropped or knocked heavily, if they did it'd be more luck than anything IMO.

 

[odd jim]

Did I say I was looking down at other peoples choices, just asked for experiences they have had with the lenses build.
Also as stated I have a lot of very good expensive lenses, just want an all rounder for snaps etc and I don't want to carry around loads of heavy gear
all day just for candid shots, take it you haven't had any problems when dropping/knocking your sigmas etc. ?

You make it sound as if dropping a lens is a daily occurrence for you, lol! As I said earlier, drop any lens and you'll have issues with it 99% of the time.

My Sigmas have occasionally had a knock (though I'm very careful with my kit) while in use and I've never had an issue.

Of my 12 lenses, I have 4 Sigma's, the rest are Canons (pretty good ones), and I've only had a failure on one of my lenses - that was a Canon.

 

[cymruchris]

I had a Sigma 105mm Macro once - really didn't get on with it. Noisy and didn't focus well in lower light. I changed to the Canon was a huge improvement. In recent years aside from the Sigma macro, I've only used Canon lenses and haven't regretted any of them.

 

[snerkler]

I had a Sigma 105mm Macro once - really didn't get on with it. Noisy and didn't focus well in lower light. I changed to the Canon was a huge improvement. In recent years aside from the Sigma macro, I've only used Canon lenses and haven't regretted any of them.

I found that with the older Sigma Macro. I've now got the newer OS version and I can't fault it.

 

[odd jim]

I had a Sigma 105mm Macro once - really didn't get on with it. Noisy and didn't focus well in lower light. I changed to the Canon was a huge improvement. In recent years aside from the Sigma macro, I've only used Canon lenses and haven't regretted any of them.

The new (current) 105mm OS macro is a stunning lens, as good as the Canon L lens (optically possibly better).

It's true that older Sigmas had QC issues (a de-centred 10-20 anyone?) but over recent years they've improved massively, to the point they've become one of the best and most innovative lens makers out there. The Sigma dock being another innovative creation which adds a lot of tweaking and features.

My next purchase? That'll be a Sigma 20mm f/1.4, can't wait

 

[Phil V]

In 30 years of shooting I've managed 3 camera / lens drops, 2 were me one my wife, I'm not there's enough data to say how any of the gear holds up. But for the record - a Chinon CP7M and kit lens, dropped from 8ft trashed both. 40d and 17-55 dropped from 3ft, lens needed calibrating, 85mm 1.8 dropped from 2ft, lens unscathed, hood total loss.

But then I'd also say after 30 years and more than 20 cameras and dozens of lenses I know the difference between good and bad build, and I have no reason to want to buy a superzoom from any manufacturer. YMMV

Have you actually handled a Sigma Art lens, or is your only experience the cheaper models?

 

[odd jim]

In 30 years of shooting I've managed 3 camera / lens drops, 2 were me one my wife, I'm not there's enough data to say how any of the gear holds up. But for the record - a Chinon CP7M and kit lens, dropped from 8ft trashed both. 40d and 17-55 dropped from 3ft, lens needed calibrating, 85mm 1.8 dropped from 2ft, lens unscathed, hood total loss.

But then I'd also say after 30 years and more than 20 cameras and dozens of lenses I know the difference between good and bad build, and I have no reason to want to buy a superzoom from any manufacturer. YMMV

Have you actually handled a Sigma Art lens, or is your only experience the cheaper models?

It's not just the art lenses in fairness, the 150-600 c is built like a tank!

 

[Gremlin]

Just to give a different slant on things

https://www.talkphotography.co.uk/t...up-with-nikon-zoom-lens-build-quality.624919/

Yes seen that, bet he's glad I have never hired from them

 

[Gremlin]

Have you actually handled a Sigma Art lens, or is your only experience the cheaper models?

Nope no idea what they are but a search tells me they are all short fixed focal 35/50 etc. not something I would ever use on
my subject matter so not of interest.
As you have no idea what sigmas I have had how can you assume they are cheaper models, just because I bought a cheap £550 super zoom
for convenience, doesn't mean all my gear is low end quality

 

[Phil V]

Nope no idea what they are but a search tells me they are all short fixed focal 35/50 etc. not something I would ever use on
my subject matter so not of interest.
As you have no idea what sigmas I have had how can you assume they are cheaper models, just because I bought a cheap £516 super zoom
for convenience, doesn't mean all my gear is low end quality

I never suggested it was, I don't make sweeping statements like that.

Meanwhile someone in this thread seems to think that all Sigma lenses are s***. Now that's a sweeping statement and a stupid one to boot

 

[odd jim]

Nope no idea what they are but a search tells me they are all short fixed focal 35/50 etc. not something I would ever use on
my subject matter so not of interest.
As you have no idea what sigmas I have had how can you assume they are cheaper models, just because I bought a cheap £550 super zoom
for convenience, doesn't mean all my gear is low end quality

They aren't all primes, there's some revolutionary fast zooms too.

You really should do your homework before you slate and discount an entire range of lenses, you'll miss out on some great products

 

[StewartR]

As I said I don't dispute how sharp etc they are, it's the build quality that lets them down for me.

I would have agreed with that opinion 3 years ago. I don't now.

Sigma used to have QC problems. They also used to build some lenses which tended to be a bit fragile. Not the shorter ones so much, but things like the OS mechanisms in the 120-400 and 150-500 which were prone to failure.

But the lenses they've introduced in the last 3 years or so have improved beyond belief. The build quality of their Art range appears to be up there with Zeiss lenses, and definitely head and shoulders above Nikon and Canon.[*] The Sports range is incredibly rugged. (Someone back there mentioned that the 150-600 C is built like a tank, but it's light and flimsy compared to the 150-600 S!)

You really should handle some of Sigma's Art and Sport lenses. It will be a real eye-opener.


[*] At least externally. I don't know what the internal build quality is like because I haven't seen any stripped down. I suspect they're pretty darn good, because I don't see how they could achieve that buttery-smooth focus mechanism if the internal components weren't up to spec, but I can't be sure. Still, they can't be worse than Nikon's so-called professional zooms.

 

[odd jim]

I would have agreed with that opinion 3 years ago. I don't now.

Sigma used to have QC problems. They also used to build some lenses which tended to be a bit fragile. Not the shorter ones so much, but things like the OS mechanisms in the 120-400 and 150-500 which were prone to failure.

But the lenses they've introduced in the last 3 years or so have improved beyond belief. The build quality of their Art range appears to be up there with Zeiss lenses, and definitely head and shoulders above Nikon and Canon.[*] The Sports range is incredibly rugged. (Someone back there mentioned that the 150-600 C is built like a tank, but it's light and flimsy compared to the 150-600 S!)

You really should handle some of Sigma's Art and Sport lenses. It will be a real eye-opener.


[*] At least externally. I don't know what the internal build quality is like because I haven't seen any stripped down. I suspect they're pretty darn good, because I don't see how they could achieve that buttery-smooth focus mechanism if the internal components weren't up to spec, but I can't be sure. Still, they can't be worse than Nikon's so-called professional zooms.

...the 150-600 c is still built like a tank! There's absolutely nothing flimsy about it!

 

[StewartR]

...the 150-600 c is still built like a tank! There's absolutely nothing flimsy about it!

I haven't experienced the 150-600 C, Jim, but I'm not arguing with you. It's just that not all tanks are the same. The 150-600 S is 50% heavier than the 150-600 C (2860g vs 1930g according to Sigma UK). It's like a German WWII Tiger compared with a Russian WWII T-34. Both very capable in the right hands, but one of them build to take a lot more punishment than the other, albeit with some downsides relating to cost and manoeuvrability.

 

[Alastair]

In your opinion, I've owned 4 and had problems with every one of them, so never again, but that is just my experience

Was this thread started for a debate or a polemic?

"Lenses - Brand or Other Make" - seems utterly pointless if you're shouting down any contrary opinion to your own. Better suited to OOF than Talk Equipment.

 

[odd jim]

Was this thread started for a debate or a polemic?

"Lenses - Brand or Other Make" - seems utterly pointless if you're shouting down any contrary opinion to your own. Better suited to OOF than Talk Equipment.

I did find his response to my post strange - he did ask for opinions after all!

 

[odd jim]

I haven't experienced the 150-600 C, Jim, but I'm not arguing with you. It's just that not all tanks are the same. The 150-600 S is 50% heavier than the 150-600 C (2860g vs 1930g according to Sigma UK). It's like a German WWII Tiger compared with a Russian WWII T-34. Both very capable in the right hands, but one of them build to take a lot more punishment than the other, albeit with some downsides relating to cost and manoeuvrability.

Agreed, the Sport is more 'robustly' built, but that goes to show how robust the Sport is! The C is definitely designed for enthusiasts, but certainly from what I can see and feel (internals aside, though I have no reason to doubt those) its seems as solid as my Canon L zooms.

 

[Phil V]

I did find his response to my post strange - he did ask for opinions after all!

He's a lady, I'm not suggesting that makes a difference to the issue of not listening to contrary opinions, just that she's not a he

 

[odd jim]

He's a lady, I'm not suggesting that makes a difference to the issue of not listening to contrary opinions, just that she's not a he

Oh, I automatically think of Gremlins as masculine things, lol!

 

[Spiritflier]

Three of my lenses are Sigma. The older 50mm f/1.4 DG, the 105mm DG OS Macro and the 150-600mm Sport and I'd happily pit them against any branded lens out there. I look after my kit so none of them have been bashed so I can't comment on reliability issues apart from saying that none of my Sigma lenses have needed repairing but one of my Nikkor lenses has!

 

[odd jim]

Three of my lenses are Sigma. The older 50mm f/1.4 DG, the 105mm DG OS Macro and the 150-600mm Sport and I'd happily pit them against any branded lens out there. I look after my kit so none of them have been bashed so I can't comment on reliability issues apart from saying that none of my Sigma lenses have needed repairing but one of my Nikkor lenses has!

Sigma lenses are "branded", they're just not Canon or Nikon