i owned the sigma and unloaded it because of focus inconsistency. i am not a huge pixel peeper/the type of person who endlessly micro-adjusts lenses. it was a random thing... it'd be spot on, then it'd be off by five feet. weird. anyways it happened frequently enough that i couldn't ignore it.
seems to not be an issue for some folks, so i'd say get a copy and take it for a spin. if it works out, you've just saved yourself $300 or so
goosemang wrote:
it'd be spot on, then it'd be off by five feet.
5 feet? I have never heard of something that radically off.
I love my Sigma 35. It blows the doors off the 35L in so many ways. I could not be happier with that lens. As a bonus to superior IQ the build quality of the Sigma is much, much, much better than the 35L. The 35L has a lot of plastic. The first time I used it I thought......this thing feels elcheapo.
Tom K. wrote:
...the build quality of the Sigma is much, much, much better than the 35L..
Oh, Please. Really, build quality? The 35L has been in more conflict and demanding press situations than arguably any lens to date. In the last 15 years, the 35L has served in countless conflicts (actual wars and riots) and the daily beatings of thousands of photojournalists. It is still the workhorse of our presidential photographer and that of countless combat photographers.
Are you really going to get on an internet forum and talk about a six month old lens being proven from a build quality standpoint versus 35L?
Certainly the Sigma is an awesome lens. But, that doesnt make the highly proven and decorated 35L not so.
Luta13 wrote:
Oh, Please. Really, build quality? The 35L has been in more conflict and demanding press situations than arguably any lens to date. In the last 15 years, the 35L has served in countless conflicts (actual wars and riots) and the daily beatings of thousands of photojournalists. It is still the workhorse of our presidential photographer and that of countless combat photographers.
Are you really going to get on an internet forum and talk about a six month old lens being proven from a build quality standpoint?
Of course he can talk about the build quality after six months. Most reviews also do that from day one. It's not like you have to wait 15 years and use it in several wars first. My Zeiss 35mm lens also has better build. Without using it 15 years in wars I can tell that..........
People also talked about the 35L build when that lens was new on the market. And I don't think we have to wait 15 years to know that Canons new super teles have great build either
Picked up a Sigma 35 to shoot a paid birthday party. Fantastic lens. If Sigma keeps pumping out lenses like this little gem I might have to convert to an all Sigma lineup.
Luta13 wrote:
Oh, Please. Really, build quality? The 35L has been in more conflict and demanding press situations than arguably any lens to date. In the last 15 years, the 35L has served in countless conflicts (actual wars and riots) and the daily beatings of thousands of photojournalists. It is still the workhorse of our presidential photographer and that of countless combat photographers.
Are you really going to get on an internet forum and talk about a six month old lens being proven from a build quality standpoint?
+1
I trust my 35L as much as I ever trusted my 24-70L and 70-200L - It is designed to take a beating and not screw up over a long period of time in inclement (though not rainy) weather. When Sigma starts producing lenses that can be on the market for longer than 3 or 4 years without reliability concerns, then I will trust them. It is fantastic that they improved the external quality of their lenses, but I still worry about the internal mechanical bits that are even more important than how the lens feels in my hands.
I have enjoyed my 35L for a dozen years. It is an excellent lens with accurate and relatively quick focus. The IQ, blur and colors are wonderful. I must admit to being impressed by the Sigma at ImagingUSA. It had sold build and impressive fit and finish. IQ focus and blur are excellent, however, I prefer the colors of the Canon. I can see why the Sigma may be the choice for some photographers, for me, I am keeping the 35l.
Strokes for folks.
Tom K. wrote:
5 feet? I have never heard of something that radically off.
yeah it was really wonky. either spot on, or way off. i may try another copy some day, but right now i'm using my 28 and my 40, so it's not on the top of the list.
Luta13 wrote:
Oh, Please. Really, build quality? The 35L has been in more conflict and demanding press situations than arguably any lens to date. In the last 15 years, the 35L has served in countless conflicts (actual wars and riots) and the daily beatings of thousands of photojournalists. It is still the workhorse of our presidential photographer and that of countless combat photographers.
Are you really going to get on an internet forum and talk about a six month old lens being proven from a build quality standpoint versus 35L?
Certainly the Sigma is an awesome lens. But, that doesnt make the highly proven and decorated 35L not so. ...Show more →
The 35L has a plastic housing. You read that right. Plastic. It sounds to me like you have never held the 35L or Sigma 35 in your hands. You definitely have not shot them side by side like I did. If you did you would have no other option than to declare the Sigma the MUCH better built lens.
Tom K. wrote:
The 35L has a plastic housing. You read that right. Plastic. It sounds to me like you have never held the 35L or Sigma 35 in your hands. You definitely have not shot them side by side like I did. If you did you would have no other option than to declare the Sigma the MUCH better built lens.
Held them both. Shot them both (although it was the Nikon flavor). Own one.
Plastic or not, its proven itself in fifteen years of tough environments and professional use.
A Glock handgun isnt metal and doesnt 'seem' to have the build quality of many of its all-metal peers, but like the 35L, it is proven and is the most widely carried law enforcement handgun today.
My point is this: Despite how the 35L might 'feel' in your hand, it has proven itself in many profesional's kit over fifteen years. The Sigma hasnt been through that test of time yet.
The build quality comparison has me baffled. It's a lens, after all. I think those that praise the build quality is judging by the heft and how it feels in your hand, not necessarily if it will survive gorilla warfare.
There is a long history of 35L's breaking at the slightest knock.
hahahaaha, j/k.
The 70-200 F4 IS was once derided as "plastic" too, like the 100L and the 6D, yet reports of their disintegration have not been abundant.
Luta13 wrote:
My point is this: Despite how the 35L might 'feel' in your hand, it has proven itself in many profesional's kit over fifteen years. The Sigma hasnt been through that test of time yet.
That's because there's no alternative until now. The nearest one is the EF 35 f2... a close relative to the plastic fantastic 50 1.8 in terms of build quality.
I have no problem with non-metal build lenses. It's not like I use them as a hammer. Time will tell if the Sigma 35 will prove to be the top 35mm prime. Maybe Canon will come out with a 35L II soon. No doubt at an exorbitant price.
Hey, maybe one should slam the two lens together at a high velocity and then try and take some kitten photos to determine which one is better built!
Luta13 wrote:
Held them both. Shot them both (although it was the Nikon flavor). Own one.
Plastic or not, its proven itself in fifteen years of tough environments and professional use.
A Glock handgun isnt metal and doesnt 'seem' to have the build quality of many of its all-metal peers, but like the 35L, it is proven and is the most widely carried law enforcement handgun today.
My point is this: Despite how the 35L might 'feel' in your hand, it has proven itself in many professional's kit over fifteen years. The Sigma hasnt been through that test of time yet.
I disagree. To each his own. The IQ of the Sigma does blow the doors off the 35L. That's a fact.
I had the sigma and sent it back due to squeaking....IQ was great and I just ordered another one ....Hopefully this one is not a squeaker.....This lens is a bargain if they get the squeak out of it.
