You bought a 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM with a Canon mount but you wanted to move on and take advantage of the newest Nikon DSLR? Well, OK. you just have to send back the lens to Sigma to have it refitted at the Sigma USA service center into a Nikon-mount version of the same lens. No need to sell all your lenses on eBay when switching brands.

Prices: between $80/100€ (for a DN lens for hybrid cameras) and $250/325€ (for a 120-300mm f/2,8 “Sport”). [source DPreview].

This is a true world-wide premiere but the surprise is less in the technology than in the announcement process: Nothing filtered out on any Internet web site until the very last hours. Nevertheless, it certainly took more than a year for Sigma to organize this conversion service and to present the seven first lenses covered by it.

Here, I find to refreshing lessons:

1. Even a company like Sigma which is not considered as paranoid can perfectly hide such a ground-breaking strategy, including when the actual products which it is based upon are on the shelves already (the first lenses have been announced without uncovering one of their most significant features in the interest of preserving the surprise expected from the conversion service announcement itself). Kudos to Sigma!
2. This aptitude to master the communication for a photo equipment manufacturer leads me to openly ask the question of the operation of those Internet web sites that make all their business out of publishing (actively and continuously) rumors on the web. Where are their informations coming from? Comparable experience from other industry sectors (i.e. automobile) shows that there are two sources: On the one hand, small-time attention-seekers basing their “leaks” on probable or predictable informations (intelligent analysis easily leads to reliable but unoriginal data) ; On the other hand, brands and manufacturers embed these web sites into their marketing strategies and distill data according to plans and schedules they define.

We keep reading these rumor sites. The newspapers also submit themselves to the tyranny of more or less organized leaks. But we must remember that despite the continuous efforts to appear independent, professional and objective, the information there is either unfounded or mostly directed by the brands (rumor? disinformation? leaks? No! Marketing).

• Dust-proof and splash-proof construction
• High image quality close to fixed focal length lens
• Focus limiter button (to speed AF up)

Sigma also disclosed that they want this lens to be the first in a long (and new) line of “sports-oriented” lenses (read: lens line of big focal lengths, and possibly relatively inexpensive… for long lenses).

So, we will have to wait until we can see if these features are accompanied with excellent optical quality (or not) for this Sigma new 120-300mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM lens.

• 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM: $4700
• Macro 150mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM: $1600

One SLD and two FLD glass elements, to reduce chromatic aberrations. The Super Multi-Layer Coating treatment to reduce unwanted reflexions and lens flare. 9 rounded blade diaphragm. AF driven by an HSM motor. Sigma did not leave any available technology out. They seem to be intent on making an excellent lens.

The result will have to be checked and compared with the undisclosed 3200€ price. Sigma is capable of the best or the less than best depending on the balance chosen by the Marketing Department. But it seems already going in the right direction.

• Sigma 12-24mm f/4-5.6 EX DG HSM II is a new improved version of its widest zoom lens
• Sigma Macro 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM is both stabilized and Macro 1:1
• Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC APO OS HSM is designed to replace the usual 70-200mm f/2.8 on an APS-C digital sensor

Here is very good news for the Sony customers. But it’s even better when we read the list of names that Sony immediately provided: Lens manufacturers having already expressed their interest in designing lenses for the E-mount:

• Zeiss, traditional ally of Sony around the A-mount of Alpha SLR cameras.
• Tamron, old friend of the orange house, and partner back in the Minolta times.
• Cosina, owner of the very elitist Voigtländer brand.
• Sigma, manufacturer of the broadest range of compatible lenses.

Assuredly, this type of talks is usually very discreet. Here, Sony decided to strike our imaginations in one big marketing blow, demonstrating their clear intent to develop the NEX range of hybrid mirror-less cameras in the best conditions for a long life. The message has been received loud and clear.

Be warned.

photo credit: davidgsteadman

When buying a photo camera, we often research in order to decide if this is the best camera, if its features will be goo enough, but will it be robust enough? Will it be useful or necessary to purchase a warranty contract extension? Will it fail very soon?

When somebody asks me these questions (and it happens quite often since I consider myself some kind of photography expert), I am usually without good answers; Nobody really speaks about this dirty little secret: Reliability of photo cameras is a taboo issue. In most cases, talking only happens for very extreme situations (I will not mention any pro camera events in the past few years). But on a daily basis, will my camera follow me everywhere? will it survive the bad treatment I will apply? Or will it fail at the sight of the first cloud (of dust or rain)? Preferably just a couple of days after the end of the warranty period?

photo credit: Orin Zebest

So, I decided to collect more than the usual information to try and answer these questions with more than: Entry-level cameras are too cheap to be robust, are less protected than pro cameras; And, mechanics fail more than electronics.

And, I found a few interesting articles with adequate documentation. Of course, they are the rightful product of the business of some shops repairing or renting equipment and accepting to share their data with us.

And I found interesting data. For example, there is nearly no information on photo cameras, or camera bodies. But SquareTrade published rather detailed report about the repairs they did in the recent years (though mostly on point-n-shoot cameras) with some frightfully clear conclusions, like:

• More than 10% of the cameras failed before 2 years
• The statistical projection tells that there are/will-be more than 15% failure within 3 years
• Accidents are a major cause for failure: 40% of cameras were broken in such a way; We are rougher than our cameras!
• The more expensive, the more robust
• For SLR cameras, Canon and Nikon go hand-in-hand

And to think that the failure rate of major brands is around 4% within two years for a camera whose price is nearing 1000€…

But, look at the graph below:

I would like to believe that you can extend these figures out of point-n-shoots and into the SLR market, but my own professional experience with quality and reliability management (in the automotive world, if you want to know) tells me that we should not even try.

On the opposite, I found additional data about interchangeable lenses to plug into our SLR cameras. Two studies from LensPlay and LensRentals bring some more light to the issue.

From LensPlay, hundreds of lenses and users have been analyzed: among the voluntary answers provided for Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Minolta/Sony, Tamron, Tokina and Sigma, only Minolta/Sony produced less than 200 answers (a pretty nice representation of the market).

LensRental gives us a finer status because they go down to a model-by-model level. So, it’s no longer necessary to compare brands, but you can get a good idea of which glass piece is more fragile or more sturdy than others, forgetting about the good (or bad) fames.

We also appreciate a lot some of the additional comments like:

• The super tele prime lenses (300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 500mm f/4, 600mm f/4) from either Canon or Nikon are among the more reliable lenses (their simplicity is probably a good reason for such a score).
• The Sigma 120-400mm & 150-500mm had a 45% repair rate (as long as they were included in the LensRentals catalog of products).
• The Canon 50mm f/1.2 and Sigma 100-300mm are well under 10% (which is considered a good level in LensRentals)

Of course, these raw figures must be taken with a grain of salt: Rentals are often more mis-handled than bought parts, but the relative results are quite certainly representative of the underlying reality. And for example, the Canon 100-400mm seems to have an unfair bad fame about the reliability of its stabilization mechanism.

All in all, many reasons to treat your photo hardware with some care…

Sources:

• PetaPixel
• LensPlay
• LensRentals

But, apart from the rare occasions when you really need it, it’s too expensive for you and me. Why not build it yourself? Instructables does the demonstration with a Nikon D90, but it could be done with any other camera.

But you can also find a similar tool at Olympus (and it takes into account the specificities of 4/3 sensor format, of course): Perfect Lens finder.

I recommend reading a nice little post titled “All lens tests are wrong” that concludes that the only good test for a lens is to use it during a full year.

Not wrong, but I still recommend to also check my list of web sites with photo lens reviews.

Tamron focal length comparison

DPreview has a good comparison of 4 zoom lenses opening at f/2.8 for SLR cameras:

• Canon 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM
• Nikon AF-S VR 70-200mm F2.8 G
• Sigma 70-200mm 1:2.8 EX DG Apo Macro HSM II
• Tamron 70-200mm 1:2.8 Di LD (IF) Macro

Since they are one of the most coveted segment of the SLR lens market, it was worth mentionning despite the absence of some serious participants like the Sony SAL-70200G – 70-200mm f/2.8 G-Series offering (originating back into the days of the great white lenses from Minolta) or the Pentax SMC-FA* 80-200mm f/2.8 [IF] ED.

It is often difficult to group lens reviews in order to compare/evaluate a little more than their mere physical characteristics (focal length, aperture/diaphragm, or even number of individual lenses). But how would you evaluate/review optical quality? When I see the really impressive differences between two lenses, I would be prepared to judge from their price, but a cheap wide-angle lens is not always worse than a slightly more expensive one (well… if the price difference is really large, it’s not only an accident and quality explains a lot).

So, where should we go?

I collected the addresses of some web sites appearing quite able to provide this kind of quality reviews/comparisons/evaluations/tests (I try to be systematic, with your help, while telling what I believe are the strengths or the weaknesses of each one).

From here, I invite you to an orgy of lens reviews, lens tests, lens comparisons, lens evaluations. And remember to shoot some photos, too. It’s not only the lens which does the photo. Some are shot by telephones, if the photographer is an artist.