andyjh wrote:
The part that kills me is the fact that this $3000 lens will likely drop in value to $1500 (as a used lens) at a rate WAY faster than the new Canon $7000 lens will drop to $3500.

I have seen used 120-300s at similar prices used. I would buy a clean copy used and keep it. But....if I chose to sell I would not be taking the hit that the original owner took.

So much for Sigma being the affordable solution...

Peacekpr wrote:
So much for Sigma being the affordable solution...

Care to elaborate a little on this. Ever check the price of the latest lens from Canon?

Peacekpr wrote:
So much for Sigma being the affordable solution...

How does the sigma price for 35/1.4 compare to canon.

How much is canons 120-300f2.8 zoom?

My only hope is that the lens can AF track fast and accurately enough to be worth the cash.

If it does, then I could see the MSRP staying put for a while. Once AF problems start rearing their heads (especially in fast sports and tracking, etc), it's going to make everyone lose what little faith they have in Sigma.

Personally, they should ship the USB dock free with the lens - that would generate more interest and maybe prevent some returns for "bad" focus, etc.

edit - talking the 120-300 here.

Peacekpr wrote:
So much for Sigma being the affordable solution...

They are a lot cheaper than the Canon stuff in your profile Canon (1DS Mk3, 7D, 28-70L, 70-200 2.8L IS Mk2, 100-400L, 50L, and 85L.)

andyjh wrote:
The part that kills me is the fact that this $3000 lens will likely drop in value to $1500 (as a used lens) at a rate WAY faster than the new Canon $7000 lens will drop to $3500.

That's great for you. Then just buy a used one for $ 1500

You don't think $3500 is affordable for a zoom range with 300/2.8 on the long end? I understand that is a lot of money but relatively speaking that doesn't sound bad. This thing offers a hell of a lot of versatility in a package that can be used indoors and out with a good FL range.