Yakim Peled wrote:
That's almost double the price of the 50/1.4. Hopefuly the IF design will make for better AF accuracy.
Happy shooting,
Yakim.
Yeah but the MSRP of the 50 is $730 and it has a street (BH) price of $499 . so the hope would be after it has been out for a bit and all the early adopters have had theirs it could come down to around the $750 mark. If its any good then that could take quite a few buyers from the 85L
Note: Sigma USA dont have a MSRP for the 85 on their website but I would think its the pre order price that amazon have listed
Lets hope sigma now have plans to do the same with a the 35 & 24 . perhaps they could even think about some T&S lenses
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
Yeah but the MSRP of the 50 is $730 and it has a street (BH) price of $499 . so the hope would be after it has been out for a bit and all the early adopters have had theirs it could come down to around the $750 mark. If its any good then that could take quite a few buyers from the 85L
Note: Sigma USA dont have a MSRP for the 85 on their website but I would think its the pre order price that amazon have listed
Lets hope sigma now have plans to do the same with a the 35 & 24 . perhaps they could even think about some T&S lenses ...Show more →
I did actually buy a Sigma 50/1.4 and returned it as its performance in terms of AF and sharpness was very poor. My 85L is beyond superb, hence the comparison seemed a bit unlikely to say the least....
What I find fascinating about this entire thread is I would think that the most expensive or difficult aspect of lens production would be grinding, polishing, and columnating the glass. That doesn't seem to be the issue at all though as plenty of companies seem to be able to make really good lenses optically. The real issue seems to be the electronic interface with Canon bodies. I think as time goes on the aftermarket will continue to get better at this and Canon, Nikon etc. are going to have a real hard time charging such a premium for there lenses.
gene A. wrote:
What I find fascinating about this entire thread is I would think that the most expensive or difficult aspect of lens production would be grinding, polishing, and columnating the glass. That doesn't seem to be the issue at all though as plenty of companies seem to be able to make really good lenses optically. The real issue seems to be the electronic interface with Canon bodies. I think as time goes on the aftermarket will continue to get better at this and Canon, Nikon etc. are going to have a real hard time charging such a premium for there lenses....Show more →
well the EF lens system has been around for quite a while now and the 3rd party mfg's haven't got a full handle on it yet ( consistantly) so I wouldn't hold your breath.
The question is are AF systems getting worse or are we putting up with less and now not blaming the user for in bad focus shots. I mean the time it took between hitting the shuter and getting the print/slide backwould allow you time to think that the issue was the user missing the target. (no liitle red focus boxes to tell you where the AF should have been either).
Also I wonder how much has changed in the EOS AF system (re lens communication) ? as any working AF canon lens no matter what age will still work on any of the new cameras , which cant be said for some 3rd party reverse engineered AF lenses.
Lets hope Sigma can do the business with this one (maybe thats why its taken so long).
Yes, I tend to agree Sigma means to continue to offer serious competition to other lensmakers. I became a believer after using the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro lens on the Canon 40D, a pair that produced outstanding image IQ. The strong Sigma competition will keep the other lensmakers on their toes. The consumer will benefit.
anotherview wrote:
Yes, I tend to agree Sigma means to continue to offer serious competition to other lensmakers. I became a believer after using the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro lens on the Canon 40D, a pair that produced outstanding image IQ. The strong Sigma competition will keep the other lensmakers on their toes. The consumer will benefit.
IQ doesn't seem to be a big issue with Sigma, in fact they offer a lot of lenses that exhibit fantastic IQ. Where Sigma falls short more often then not is AF and or QC. If they get that down pat they will become a far larger competitor than they are now.
M Vers wrote:
IQ doesn't seem to be a big issue with Sigma, in fact they offer a lot of lenses that exhibit fantastic IQ. Where Sigma falls short more often then not is AF and or QC. If they get that down pat they will become a far larger competitor than they are now.
It will take years and years for that to wear off, and in order to even start getting over it they will have to be at or above OEM QC levels.
As a Japanese manufacturer, Sigma will likely follow a national policy decision for exported goods: Sigma will let the quality of its products speak for itself.
- ok Fred, you win.