I think it is not fair to gerealise based on the single known Canon compatibility problem. Sigma gives information about this on their web site, it affects a known range of cameras and Sigma offers a free upgrade for all lenses where this is technically feasible. Not bad for customer service.
Otherwise it is a mixed picture for me. Of my two Sigma lenses the 2,8/28-70 is very sharp, it holds very well against the FA 24-90 but the AF is less consistent than that of the Pentax ... and the 12-24 is unique anyhow but not as sharp as I would like it to be. Both feel solid and seem to have good build quality, something that cannot be said about the FA 24-90. Sven Zitat von Amita Guha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > Unfortunately and very frustratingly I have great problems > > with the new > > Sigma 18-125 DC f3.5-5.6 for Canon (20D). > > Nate and I both have this lens and Nate uses his on the 20D without a > problem. > > (That's the only > > lens I could > > afford when I finally got enough money to buy the digital > > stuff.) Optically - for a zoom of this type - it's not bad at > > all. However it is consistently inconsistently malfocusing. > > Typically it will > > focus at a point closer than the aimed focus point. > > Nate has had this problem on several of his lenses. He says that Sigma's > lenses have trouble communicating with Canon bodies. He says you need to get > it replaced, which you're already doing. But give the lens a chance when you > get a new one - it's really good for the kind of lens it is. > > > What do you guys think - can I trust a Sigma EX 70-200 f.2.8 > > APO HSM DG will > > do a good job, or will it let me down like the 18-125? > > It just depends on the lens; sometimes you get a stinker, but it's never > happened to me. I have a couple of EX lenses, the 15mm fisheye and the 20mm > f/1.8, which I like a lot. > > Amita > > >
