> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Kotsinadelis, > Peter (Peter) > Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 8:50 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [inbox] RE: EOS The word from Sigma! > > > Bill Gillooly wrote: > > Your arguments are not well thought out. > > Lotus 123 stated on the box, "system requirements" DOS 3.1, it did not > state "Intel compatible." > ----------------------------------------------- > ----- > OK Bill, and what does MS-DOS run on, an Intel. Yes, your FD lenses do > not work, but Nikon's do, at the cost of them being unable to provide a > faster optic like a 50mm F1 or 85mm F1.2 because of the restrictive size > of the collar. > The lenses are compatible, just not always 100%. I own 2 Sigmas and am > more than pleased with them. There is no reason to have a class-action > lawsuit because your case is so ridiculous it would be thrown out of > court. I liken this to, "I always used regular gas in my Honda Civic, > but I bought a new Acura and now must use Premium gas. So the new car I > purchased is incompatible with my gas." Also, not all tires and rins and > engine parts are 100% compatible. > > Peter K >
Peter K, Actually MS-DOS runs great (just too fast with some applications), on my AMD Athlon 64 processor 4000+ computers as does WinXPPro, W2KPro, SCO UNIX Open Server V and Red Hat Linux just to name a few. As to old Nikon lenses "working" with new Nikon AF bodies this is fiction. Just because you can mount the lens doesn't mean it works correctly with the body. Ask anybody with old non AF Nikon lenses if the auto focus and are fully coupled to the meter. For that mater ask anybody with an old Sigma lens and a newer Canon DSLR... Actually the manual for the Acura will state what fuel octane you will need to gat maximum performance out of the particular engine model and engine management system. All modern engine management systems will fall back to a lower engine power output level if lower octane fuels are used with no problem, just lower power output until the fuel octane is increased. The engine still runs safely and is not damaged. This is clearly NOT he case with Sigma lenses. If you have an older Sigma lens 8-10 years typically, Sigma just doesn't want to support it. There is no reason that these older lenses can't be made to operate with the newer bodies. This is simply a Sigma management decision. People who buy Sigma lenses should be given notice of Sigma's compatibility/retro update policy in advance of making a purchasing decision or they should be given some other remedy other than being forced to buy a new lens and being stuck with a now useless lens. It's like I've been saying for years, you get what you pay for AND what you don't. In the case of Sigma compatibility you mostly get it for a few years and then you don't. Hopefully consumers will only need one cycle to figure out that Sigma lenses are not really a better value in the long run even though they offer a lower initial cost. Once these Sigma lenses a identified as being unsupported they essentially have no value on the used market. If you take the cost of this now useless Sigma lens when it was new and add the cost of a new replacement lens and subtract the current value of the old lens you can get an idea of the real cost of using a Sigma lens. If you do the same thing with a comparable Canon lens you will see that buying the "better" Canon consumer lenses offer a much better value than the Sigma lenses. Do the same thing with the "better Sigma and Canon lenses and Canon will still have a lower real cost of ownership not to mention generally better image from the better Canon lenses. Of course this analysis assumes that you will keep your Canon and Sigma lenses and upgrade your bodies over time. The differential is no different if you keep buying and selling your Sigma lenses as newer models come out to replace them before then become obsolete and non-functional with the newer bodies. the advantage to buying new lenses as soon as they come out is that you will not need to have the down time during the re-chip serving by Sigma and you will have their latest thinking in lens design and construction which is a good thing as Sigma has continued to improve over the last several years. Either way IMO, typically Canon lenses represent a better overall value in the long run than the Sigma lenses when using a Canon EOS body. This may also eventually be the same situation for Sigma lenses using HSM motors for AF in Nikon AF mounts now that Nikon is now offering modern electronic mounts on their camera bodies. Cheers/Chip Cheers/Chip * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
