I Didn't Know Sigma Made A Digital SLR

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Sloopy, Jan 14, 2004.

  1. Sloopy

    Sloopy Guest

    Is it as good as their lenses?

    -Sloopy
    Sloopy, Jan 14, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Sloopy

    AArDvarK Guest

    Nope, and not worth it. In this group look
    for the subject header:
    SD9 v. 10D sensors, and limits by William Wallace
    Read in there.
    --
    Sincerely,
    Alex
    California central coast
    ----------------------------------------
    e-mail address not given,
    reply here.
    ----------------------------------------



    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is it as good as their lenses?
    >
    > -Sloopy
    AArDvarK, Jan 14, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Sloopy

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    Sloopy <> wrote:
    > Is it as good as their lenses?


    Don't bait poor George and Guido now, we need their rest. ;-)
    Chris Brown, Jan 14, 2004
    #3
  4. Sloopy

    Dan Sullivan Guest

    "Chris Brown" <_uce_please.com> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Sloopy <> wrote:
    > > Is it as good as their lenses?

    >
    > Don't bait poor George and Guido now, we need their rest. ;-)


    Yeah...yeah... that's the ticket!

    Anybody have any opinions???

    Anybody posted anything yet?

    :-DDDDDDDDDDDDD
    Dan Sullivan, Jan 14, 2004
    #4
  5. > Is it as good as their lenses?

    Yeah...it's just about as crappy as their lenses.
    Randall Ainsworth, Jan 14, 2004
    #5
  6. Sloopy

    Bobs Guest

    On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 01:16:56 -0800, Sloopy <> wrote:

    > Is it as good as their lenses?
    >
    >-Sloopy

    --I certainly hope not..
    Bobs, Jan 14, 2004
    #6
  7. Sloopy

    Dan Sullivan Guest

    "Randall Ainsworth" <> wrote in message
    news:140120040645334193%...
    > > Is it as good as their lenses?

    >
    > Yeah...it's just about as crappy as their lenses.


    As with all manufacturers some products stand out more than others.

    A while back one of Sigma's wide angle zooms was so good it was rumored that
    Leitz was going to have Sigma make the lens for them in their mount.

    Have fun, Dan Sullivan
    Dan Sullivan, Jan 14, 2004
    #7
  8. Sloopy

    Paul H. Guest

    "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is it as good as their lenses?
    >
    > -Sloopy


    Please don't feed the animals. They get excited and attack passers-by.
    Paul H., Jan 14, 2004
    #8
  9. Sloopy

    Tony Spadaro Guest

    Tony Spadaro, Jan 14, 2004
    #9
  10. In article <iMdNb.34294$>,
    Dan Sullivan says...

    > A while back one of Sigma's wide angle zooms
    > was so good it was rumored that Leitz was going
    > to have Sigma make the lens for them in their mount.


    Er.... no. It was not rumored, it was official
    that the 35-70 mm Zoom that Leica Camera handed
    to people trying the R8 in their test campaign
    was made by Sigma.

    And just because it said Leica on the barrel
    didn't make it any less unimpressive.

    --
    Michael Quack <>

    http://www.photoquack.de/glamour/1.htm
    http://www.photoquack.de/fashion/1.htm
    Michael Quack, Jan 15, 2004
    #10
  11. Sloopy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Michael Quack wrote:

    > And just because it said Leica on the barrel
    > didn't make it any less unimpressive.


    Panasonic P&S digicameras now bear the name "Leica"
    on their lenses. Gee, is that because Panasonic bought
    Leica maybe? ;-)
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 17, 2004
    #11
  12. "Sloopy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Is it as good as their lenses?


    It is the only DSLR worth considering, otherwise, go film.
    George Preddy, Jan 17, 2004
    #12
  13. Sloopy

    Heini Guest

    On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 09:19:51 GMT, "Paolo Pizzi"
    <> wrote:

    >Michael Quack wrote:
    >
    >> And just because it said Leica on the barrel
    >> didn't make it any less unimpressive.

    >
    >Panasonic P&S digicameras now bear the name "Leica"
    >on their lenses. Gee, is that because Panasonic bought
    >Leica maybe? ;-)


    No. Leica Camera is owned by Hermes - vastly expensive 'lifestyle'
    outfit.
    Heini, Jan 18, 2004
    #13
  14. Sloopy

    Ray Fischer Guest

    George Preddy <> wrote:

    >> Is it as good as their lenses?

    >
    >It is the only DSLR worth considering,


    Exxcept that it's of 2nd-rate quality, limited in features, limited in
    options, and has an indifferent sensor.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Jan 18, 2004
    #14
  15. Sloopy

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:bucsfd$pf$1
    @bolt.sonic.net:

    > George Preddy <> wrote:
    >
    >>> Is it as good as their lenses?

    >>
    >>It is the only DSLR worth considering,

    >
    > Exxcept that it's of 2nd-rate quality, limited in features, limited in
    > options, and has an indifferent sensor.
    >


    Yup - the Sigma is worth considering, but the others are worth buying...
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 18, 2004
    #15
  16. Sloopy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Heini wrote:

    >> Panasonic P&S digicameras now bear the name "Leica"
    >> on their lenses. Gee, is that because Panasonic bought
    >> Leica maybe? ;-)

    >
    > No. Leica Camera is owned by Hermes - vastly expensive
    > 'lifestyle' outfit.


    Hermes only owns 31.5% of the company, which is mostly
    controlled by the Japanese.

    http://www.leicacamera.com/unternehmen/presse/data/01934/index_e.html
    Paolo Pizzi, Jan 18, 2004
    #16
  17. "Jeff Shoaf" <> wrote in message
    news:Xns9474AE6A64E0Djeffshoafalltel.net@63.223.5.95...
    > (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:bucsfd$pf$1
    > @bolt.sonic.net:
    >
    > > George Preddy <> wrote:
    > >
    > >>> Is it as good as their lenses?
    > >>
    > >>It is the only DSLR worth considering,

    > >
    > > Exxcept that it's of 2nd-rate quality, limited in features, limited in
    > > options, and has an indifferent sensor.


    Thank God the sensor is different. The quality is amazing for the money,
    much better than the Fisher Price 300D, the D100 is very light duty as well,
    though much better built that the dRebel. The Fuji is pricey, but at least
    you get a reasonably well built body. The 10D lags the bunch with mediocre
    build quality (too many creaks with its weak frame) and consistently blurry
    images.

    > Yup - the Sigma is worth considering, but the others are worth buying...


    If your only goal is to have Canon printed on the front, get the 300D. At
    least it is priced reasonably close to the prosumer cameras with similar
    image quality. Personally, I think the F717 is a much better buy, better
    sharper images and Sony's build quality is night and day compared to the
    very poorly built Canon. Unfortunately both are very slow to operate.

    If you want image quality, the only choice at the moment is Sigma. Bayer is
    obsolete, even Sony, the largest maker of Bayer sensors has abandoned the
    design. Thankfully, the Sigmas are also the best built DSLRs on sale for
    under $4000.
    George Preddy, Jan 19, 2004
    #17
  18. Sloopy

    Ray Fischer Guest

    George Preddy <> wrote:
    >
    >"Jeff Shoaf" <> wrote in message
    >news:Xns9474AE6A64E0Djeffshoafalltel.net@63.223.5.95...
    >> (Ray Fischer) wrote in news:bucsfd$pf$1
    >> @bolt.sonic.net:
    >>
    >> > George Preddy <> wrote:
    >> >
    >> >>> Is it as good as their lenses?
    >> >>
    >> >>It is the only DSLR worth considering,
    >> >
    >> > Exxcept that it's of 2nd-rate quality, limited in features, limited in
    >> > options, and has an indifferent sensor.

    >
    >Thank God the sensor is different. The quality is amazing for the money,


    Other than having inconsistent color accuracy and so-so detail.

    --
    Ray Fischer
    Ray Fischer, Jan 19, 2004
    #18
  19. "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    news:bufe33$2ci$...
    >
    > If you want image quality, the only choice at the moment is Sigma. Bayer

    is
    > obsolete, even Sony, the largest maker of Bayer sensors has abandoned the
    > design. Thankfully, the Sigmas are also the best built DSLRs on sale for
    > under $4000.
    >


    Foveon is a cheap trick. All it has is pixellated sharpness which looks good
    on a monitor but prints and enlarges badly.
    Manfred von Richthofen, Jan 19, 2004
    #19
  20. Sloopy

    Jeff Shoaf Guest

    "Manfred von Richthofen" <> wrote in
    news:bugcft$i1p$:

    > "George Preddy" <> wrote in message
    > news:bufe33$2ci$...
    >>
    >> If you want image quality, the only choice at the moment is Sigma.
    >> Bayer

    > is
    >> obsolete, even Sony, the largest maker of Bayer sensors has abandoned
    >> the design. Thankfully, the Sigmas are also the best built DSLRs on
    >> sale for under $4000.
    >>

    >
    > Foveon is a cheap trick. All it has is pixellated sharpness which
    > looks good on a monitor but prints and enlarges badly.
    >
    >


    Actually (according to GP), it doesn't matter how it looks on a monitor or
    prints or enlarges since the negative is the "be all and end all of
    photography"...
    Jeff Shoaf, Jan 19, 2004
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Mark Herring
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    319
    BG250
    Dec 8, 2003
  2. Lionel
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    739
    Ken Tough
    Sep 17, 2004
  3. Newsgroups
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    410
    ASAAR
    Jun 1, 2005
  4. alex

    Film SLR Flash unit on a Digital SLR - Possible?

    alex, Jun 18, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    1,006
  5. jazu

    Rebel XT, made in Japan, made in Thailand

    jazu, Dec 8, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    1,028
    John Turco
    Dec 12, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page