> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kotsinadelis, > Peter (Peter) > Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 8:17 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: EOS Sigma 15-30mm - Speculation is not education > > > > > Chip Louie wrote (edited & reply in-line): > Hi Peter, > > > Where are the reports giving the Sigma 15-30 3.5-4.5EX > > top tier labs and field tests? Are they published somewhere > > on the web so I can see how they tested them? Did they > > test them on a digital body? Which one? Who did > > these tests? Do you have one of the new Sigma > > 15-30 3.5-4.5EX zooms? Have you tested it on > > EOS film and digital bodies yet? > > Chip, from the sounds of it you have not seen any report > on the lens, so how can you say it would only be adequate > as you did? > > > Canon must be doing something right, apparently the > > market will bear more for Canon "L" and non"L" lenses > > regardless of color than for Sigma lenses of any moniker. > > I've not said anything to the contrary. Canon has done an > excellent job in optic development. I simply do not agree > with your assessment of a lens you have not used or read > a report about. Its like saying something is > good or bad without ever having seen, touched, or used it. > > What you provided was an opinion based on incomplete > information. This is called speculation. > Had you used or read about the lens and then provided > real world information, it would be education. > There is a big difference between the two. > > > Peter K >
Hi Peter, Ah, you assumed too much, I'm afraid that you've misunderstood what I asked, I wanted to know what reports you were referring to. Of course I've read the FM site reviews written by Fred of the EF 16-35 2.8L EF 17-40 4L and EF 17-35 2.8L, I'm a regular and have all of his PS actions for the EOS 1D. I've also read the all the Canon and the one Sigma review on LL, and Klaus Schroiff's and on these sites I have seen no one claim that the Sigma 15-30 "blows away the EF 17-40 4L", you're the only one making this claim. On FM's site, several of the 7 reviewers make mention of the odd and awkward manual to AF switch and AF ring operation and different operation than their Canon lenses, also mention the AF speed as slow and noisy. All of the reviewers who rank the Sigma well bought the lens and none of them mention having other ultra-wide angle lenses to compare them with directly. None of them reported doing informal or formal tests for sharpness using film or digital bodies. On the PhotoZone lens survey the Sigma 15-30mm zoom fared rather poorly. As a matter of fact, of the 15 WA zoom lenses shown in a Canon mount on KS's PhotoZone the Sigma 15-30mm zoom ranks 13th of 15 lenses surveyed. The only lenses ranked lower are the Vivitar 19-35mm and Sigma 18-35mm lenses. I don't generally put a lot of stock in any one test or one example of a lens. I also don't put too much stock in a single web site reviewer though some of them I do respect like Fred M, Don Baccus and several others I've found to align closely to my own experience with the same products. I have not shot any images with the Sigma 15-30mm zoom yet but have played with one and like the build quality. This is one area where Sigma has listened to the consumers in the field, I doubt it will fall apart as fast as the older Sigmas used to if at all. You never mentioned if you purchased the Sigma 15-30mm zoom or if you've shot any images and done any tests with it. Have you? How did you do your tests and what were your results? OBTW, here are some images someone else did that compares several Canon lenses including the EF 28-135IS, these seem representative of the EF 28-135IS lens' performance compared to the Canon "L" class zooms. The images show an obvious and a less obvious problem with the EF 28-135IS images, the corners are obviously very blurry even stopped down and less obvious is that the contrast is lower than with the "L" zooms. Look at the other images and you can see that the centers are also less sharp than the "L" zooms compared. http://www.pbase.com/image/16730485 http://www.pbase.com/image/16730487 Not much speculation needed here to see that your very high opinion and past claim that the EF 28-135 3.5-5.6IS performs as well as an "L" zoom may be somewhat overzealous. Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
