Sigma or Canon 55-200mm?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Just wondering if anyone has any opinion on which is better...the Canon
is slightly more expensive, but not even worth considering the price
difference. I'm looking for a quality difference here.

Thanks in advance,
Nicholas

P.S. I've looked at http://slr-lens.com/

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Cool, I wasn't aware of those problems...looks like it might only be a
concern if you are buying used or old lenses. But I will certainly keep
it in mind. Any idea of which lense typically has the fastest or best
autofocus? (Not necessarily this lens, but in general)

Thanks again

rbehunin@alumni.weber.edu wrote:
> Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
>
>>Just wondering if anyone has any opinion on which is better...the
>
> Canon
>
>>is slightly more expensive, but not even worth considering the price
>>difference. I'm looking for a quality difference here.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>Nicholas
>>
>>P.S. I've looked at http://slr-lens.com/
>
>
> Hi Nicholas,
>
> Some people have reported problems using the sigma lenses on the EOS
> series cameras (Digital Rebel, 300D, etc). You might do a search on
> Google about this and see what it turns up.
>
> In a nutshell what has been posted = There were some posts to the
> effect that Canon had the Electronic Lens mount as a trade secret, or
> patent or something like that and would not release it to Sigma. Sigma
> had to reverse engineer the Electronic Lens mount, and the lens did not
> always work.
>
> I do not have a Sigma lens, so I do not know first hand. I have the
> kit lens, and a 70-300 telephoto zoom lens. If I need anything with a
> wider angle then the kit lens (18mm) - I shoot with a medium format
> camera. I have a fisheye lens for a keiv 88. However, the keiv 88 is
> cumbersome to use...
>
> roland
>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Todd H. wrote:
> Nicholas Wittebol <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> writes:
>
> > Cool, I wasn't aware of those problems...looks like it might only
be a
> > concern if you are buying used or old lenses.
>
> That is correct. It's not a concern really for your use of a new
lens
> on your current model camera. Keep in mind though that in the
future,
> Canon might rev the electronics and make the Sigma not compatible
with
> a future canon camera. I find myself sitting on $1000 worth of Sigma
> f/2.8 APO lenses bought in 93 that I was sorely disappointed to find
> that I cannot use on my 300D in any mode other than Aperture priority
> set to f/2.8. :-) Err 99 flashes if any other aperture is tried or
> attempted to be set by the camera. Newer Sigma lense post Elan 7 I
> believe all work fine though.
>
> Even so, your question is sure to spark debate because it seems to be
> anathema to suggest that a Sigma lens might possibly be superior to a
> manufacturer's lens in this newsgroup. :-) But it is a good
question.
> I'm just not terribly sure how likely you are to get an unbiased
> reasonable opinion out of this collection of folks when you mentioned
> the "S" word.
>
> If in doubt though, and the cost is similar, my eperience above would
> push you in the direction of the Canon lens with assurance of future
> compatibility and protecting your investment.
>
> There are lens review sites though that do a lot of aberration and
> color and sharpness tests and such. I don't have them off hand, but
> they're out there. A search of this newsgroup in groups.google.com
> for lens reviews of something might yield fruit as they've been
> mentioned recently.
>
> Best Regards,
> --
> Todd H.
> http://www.toddh.net/

When I had a Canon T-70, I did have a couple of Sigma Lenses. The
image quality was fine. However, the durablity... well, they were not
as durable as the Canon lenses. They wore out over time. The wide
angle zoom lens I had fell apart after a few years of moderate use.

So, I guess you get what you pay for.

roland

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Dragan Cvetkovic wrote:
> rbehunin@alumni.weber.edu writes:
>
> > In a nutshell what has been posted = There were some posts to the
> > effect that Canon had the Electronic Lens mount as a trade secret,
or
> > patent or something like that and would not release it to Sigma.
Sigma
> > had to reverse engineer the Electronic Lens mount, and the lens did
not
> > always work.
>
> From what I have read before, it's actually the other way round:
Sigma was
> too cheap to buy or licence Canon's lens interface technology and
tried to
> reverse engineer it, but it didn't always work. Some other lens
> manufacturers did licence the technologu from Canon and don't have
that
> problem.
>
> But this is probably not the case any more as I am pretty sure that
Sigma's
> HSM lenses use licenced EOS interface technology.
>
> Dragan

It was something like that. I just remembered reading something about
Sigma reverse engineering the Canon EOS lens mount, and it doesn't
always work.

I didn't remember the details. I had enough experience with reverse
engineering projects that didn't work... that alone is enough to scare
me away from sigma.

roland