Non-digital 105mm Sigma Macro : Why so expensive?

[Andrew Cunningham]

Good morning,

Whilst browsing the internet I have come across this page on Amazon showing a non-digital version of the 105mm Sigma f2.8 Macro lens retailing at over a thousand dollars!

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000501QZ?tag ... 3HRNMGDQD8&

Why are they pricing it so dear?

Regards,
Andrew.

[Mikhail]

It's confusing, but it seems that the lens actually costs $479. I don't know what the higher price of over $1000 applies to.

Misha

[Zonda]

It's dear because it's Canon fit. I've got a Sigma 105mm EX DG macro (Nikon fit) for sale, and can't give it away. £100 and you collect. Boxed, with a case, brill lens too.

[Andrew Cunningham]

Good afternoon,

I ask as I just bought a 105mm Sigma f2.8 Macro and just realised it is a non-digital version. There is no DG in the name.

It works well on my Canon 40D, fits nicely, was mint condition and takes real nice images.

I paid £200 and somehow feel I have been had despite it being a lovely lens. I have it on three month warranty so should I take it back or keep it?

Sometimes when I take an image it rotates as if the camera thought I took a vertical shot. This is a slight irritation though.

Anyone else using non-digital versions on their digital cameras, especially Canon, and how are you doing with them?

Regards,
Andrew.

[Zonda]

I'm looking at the box now. It has 'For nikon AF D'. The 'D' means digital. All but one of the pics in my personal gallery on here were taken with this lens, coupled with a Nikon D200. I really don't understand the 'rotation' thing. If it works well on your Canon,,,it must be digitally compatible. I would keep it.

[Andrew Cunningham]

It's confusing, but it seems that the lens actually costs $479. I don't know what the higher price of over $1000 applies to.

Misha

Evening Misha,

The $459 price is for the digital version. The $1,102 is for the non-digital version.

Regards,
Andrew.

[Andrew Cunningham]

I'm looking at the box now. It has 'For nikon AF D'. The 'D' means digital. All but one of the pics in my personal gallery on here were taken with this lens, coupled with a Nikon D200. I really don't understand the 'rotation' thing. If it works well on your Canon,,,it must be digitally compatible. I would keep it.

Evening Zonda,

This is my current thinking. It works beautifully on my camera so makes sense to keep it.

Unless it happens to be worth a fortune. IN that case I would have flogged it and bought a new digital version!

Regards,
Andrew.

[Dave McCormick]

I am not sure why that lens was so expensive, maybe to entise some gulible person into paying so much for a lens when they can get a newer digital one cheaper? Or maybe the non digital versions are rarer and cost so much because of this?

I know Canon stuff costs more because they are a big company and I have read that they said they need to conver the cost of their advertising and this does that, however I don't know if this should apply to Sigma lenses, canon fit or not as they don't use big advertising campaigns, they let the quality of the lenses speak for themselves and thats how they get more sold.

[Gruditch]

Hi Andrew, I think that Amazon seller is just trying his luck.

If the seller lead you to believe that your new lens was a DG, then I would send it back. It may well work OK on your 40D, but when you update, it could be another matter and your left with a dud. I found that when a non DG lens was used with a DSLR, it would often give just a totally white image.

Regards Gruditch

[Andrew Cunningham]

Good morning,

I did think that might be an issue and three times I have had black images. I think you are right. I shall return it tomorrow. The seller did compare it with the price of a DG version on the shelf.

Basically, since knowing it is a non-digital version I have not had peace of mind really. I shall go back tomorrow and let you know how I got on.

Thanks,
Andrew.

[Markulous]

Whilst I have no idea why that lens is quoted at $1K (I bought my first, brand new Sigma AF fit, for £205 - still produces better pics than the same Canon fit lens - but that's down to the camera!), it really doesn't make that much difference whether it's DG or not. I've been using DG and non-DG lenses for years on dSLRs and, whilst the DG coating is said to help, I've never found that much difference - but it did allow Sigma to "re-issue" lenses as DG versions and so up the price slightly {he says, cynically! }

Here's the info from http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses.asp

DG Lens
The most suitable lenses for 35mm film single-lens reflex cameras, as well as for digital SLR cameras. Sigma's development of the DG (Digital) range of lenses has concentrated on the correction of distortion and aberrations. Magnification of chromatic aberration is particularly conspicuous with digital cameras. The optical designs and cutting-edge technology incorporated by Sigma eliminate flare and ghosting from te image sensor and create excellent color balance. Vignetting is minimized whilst marginal illumination is ensured. These high performance lenses are equally suited for digital and analogue cameras

[Gruditch]

Its not a quality issue with a Sigma lens being DG or not. Its a matter of if the electronics in the lens will work with the camera body or not. Canon, Nikon, Olympus etc, have no obligation to make sure that third party lenses from Sigma work on their new body's. And there was a issue with some older Sigma lenses not working properly with DSLRs.

Sigma then sorted out their electronics on the newer models, those being the DGs. If however you are so in love with your trusty old lens, they also offer a service, where you can have your old non DG lens re-chipped to work with a modern DSLR.

Regards Gruditch

[FISHiEE]

Similarly there's no gaurantee that DG lenses will work with future DSLR's.

Unless there is a known issue with the non-DG version of the lens and your camera or planned upgrade camera I'd stick with it.

The digital coating on a DG lens is meant to help cut light reflection from the sensor that isn't present in a film camera I believe - something like that anyway. I don't believe it makes all that much difference as in most cases Sigma only applied this to most of it's lenses in the last couple of years and they worked fine on DSLR's for many years before that...

[FISHiEE]

They also had similar issues in the past with their flashes not working on newer DSLR's...

That's the chanxce you take with any 3rd party manufacturer really. I know when these compatibility issues have arisen they've been quite quick to offer a fix but I'm not sure what if any charge there is for that.

[Andrew Cunningham]

Good evening,

Since this morning, I have had a rethink. I shall now keep it for a couple of weeks and test it out thoroughly as I feel it would be a shame taking a mint lens back just because I do not feel comfortable with it.

I could post some images here if possible and ask for feedback if that would be okay.

Regards,
Andrew.

[Markulous]

They also had similar issues in the past with their flashes not working on newer DSLR's...

That's the chanxce you take with any 3rd party manufacturer really. I know when these compatibility issues have arisen they've been quite quick to offer a fix but I'm not sure what if any charge there is for that.

Unsurprisingly, the likes of Canon and Nikon refuse to license the spec of their lens mounts and so Sigma reverse engineer to come up with a solution. If/When the mount spec (or the electronics) change, potential problems arise for Sigmas. Having said that Sigma will always rechip any lens and provide this service free of charge (or always have so in the past and state they will in the future)

[FISHiEE]

I guess it's not that surprising really as they have a vast range of their own lenses and want people to buy them instead!

The smaller brands such as Sony etc. must rely on these 3rd party manufactures to keep up an interest in their brand with limited lens selection of their own.

[JKT]

Having said that Sigma will always rechip any lens and provide this service free of charge (or always have so in the past and state they will in the future)

It is my understanding that they do that AS LONG AS the lens is still in production.

[Andrew Cunningham]

..............Having said that Sigma will always rechip any lens and provide this service free of charge (or always have so in the past and state they will in the future)

Good afternoon,

This certainly is interesting. If I decide to keep the lens then I may pursue this avenue and see what Sigma have to say.

Regards,
Andrew.

[FISHiEE]

As far as I can see on the web there is no compatibility issue so there's probably no re-chipping option.

The DG just refers to some coating on the lens to reduce potential lens flare caused by digital sensors compared to film. I don't believe it makes a lot of difference so I wouldn't worry about it.

I'm sure if there was a compatibility issue in the future then Sigma would offer such a re-chipping option once they fixed the problem. Right now there is no problem to be fixed.