Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma ..

In article <47bf7195$0$19527$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
Tuthill <tuthill.TakeThisOut@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:

> > Well, look at how incompetent Sigma is at creating a digital camera
> > from scratch.
>
> I think they've done pretty well considering they've only been in the
> dslr business for around 6 years.

they've done pretty well??

sigma's market share is nonexistant (under 0.1%). they can't be making
any money on the cameras, especially with the recent firesale prices.
pentax, olympus and sony (including konica/minolta) have been in the
dslr business for about the same amount of time and they're doing a
*lot* better.

> How's the Nikon/Canon/Pentax
> compacts with dlsr sized sensor developments coming along?

there are rumours that nikon is working on one (and olympus ought to be
if they aren't already), but the market for such a camera is small,
which is why nobody (other than sony and that one was a dud) has
bothered so far. current compact digicams are 'good enough.'
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

In article <47bf7118$0$17423$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
Tuthill <tuthill RemoveThis @nospamshaw.ca> wrote:

> I have no idea however I know that some older Nikon lenses, and some
> newer ones, won't AF on some newer Nikon bodies. Keep in mind that a
> lens that won't autofocus can still be manually focused. Not an ideal
> situation but many photographer's put up with that for years and some
> still value the glass in older lenses and choose to use them whether
> they AF or not.

that's a different issue. the d40/d40x/d60 do not have a built-in
focus motor and only autofocus with afs lenses (of which there are
about sixty choices). it's an entry level camera that's targetted at
the user who only buys one or two lenses (usually when they buy the
camera) and not the enthusiast who collects lenses or already has
several. it's not a protocol incompatibility, but rather a marketing
choice, and it's clearly mentioned in the camera's specifications.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

In article
<7f0debdf-6ae5-4fd2-908f-69b2f669b707 DeleteThis @z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
acl <achilleaslazarides DeleteThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Look I don't want to argue, but think about it. I have a canon lens
> and a camera. I can send stuff into the contacts and see what comes
> out. This way, I can map out how the lens reacts (the "protocol"). If
> the lens knows how to do it, I can map it out. Similarly for the body.
> Thus, I can exactly emulate the protocol.

you can emulate only what you can detect. unless you spend a *lot* of
time testing every possible combination of commands, you might miss a
few. or, it could be a timing tolerance issue. maybe other factors
too.

> The only thing I can think of is that because each lens sends an
> identifier (which does happen), newer bodies may implement things in
> different ways but when they detect an older lens switch to the old
> protocol.

that's another thing that sigma gets wrong. they reuse rom chips, and
some lenses identify themselves as something other than what they
really are.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

In article <47bf6fd2$0$21007$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
Tuthill <tuthill.TakeThisOut@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:

> Many would beg to differ with that statement however you're free to
> perpetuate it. As one of the pro's who shoots with a Sigma says
> (paraphrasing here), he's happy that the Sigma dslr market is so small
> as it gives him a competitive advantage over his competition:-) (and
> this is a fellow who was a Canon man until just over a year ago).

who might that be?
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On 2008-02-22, acl <achilleaslazarides RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On Feb 22, 11:38 pm, "Peter Stavrakoglou" <nto... RemoveThis @optonline.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Sigma does reverse engineer the protocol. Re-chipping is necessary because
>> Canon changes the protocol from time-to-time.
>
> OK but then how come old canon lenses don't need rechipping if the
> protocol's changed?

Because Canon has the specification of theprotocol.

Sigma could only copy the bits they could see and knew nothing of the
parts that Canon later used.

--
Chris Savage Kiss me. Or would you rather live in a
Gateshead, UK land where the soap won't lather?
- Billy Bragg
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On 2008-02-22 20:40:19 -0700, nospam <nospam.DeleteThis@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <47bf7118$0$17423$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
> Tuthill <tuthill.DeleteThis@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> I have no idea however I know that some older Nikon lenses, and some
>> newer ones, won't AF on some newer Nikon bodies. Keep in mind that a
>> lens that won't autofocus can still be manually focused. Not an ideal
>> situation but many photographer's put up with that for years and some
>> still value the glass in older lenses and choose to use them whether
>> they AF or not.
>
> that's a different issue. the d40/d40x/d60 do not have a built-in
> focus motor and only autofocus with afs lenses (of which there are
> about sixty choices). it's an entry level camera that's targetted at
> the user who only buys one or two lenses (usually when they buy the
> camera) and not the enthusiast who collects lenses or already has
> several. it's not a protocol incompatibility, but rather a marketing
> choice, and it's clearly mentioned in the camera's specifications.

"Protocol" or "marketing choice" both have the same end result though
do they not? Why is Sigma's protocol choice more despicable than
Nikon's marketing decision?
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On 2008-02-22 20:54:45 -0700, nospam <nospam.TakeThisOut@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <47bf6fd2$0$21007$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
> Tuthill <tuthill.TakeThisOut@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:
>
>> Many would beg to differ with that statement however you're free to
>> perpetuate it. As one of the pro's who shoots with a Sigma says
>> (paraphrasing here), he's happy that the Sigma dslr market is so small
>> as it gives him a competitive advantage over his competition:-) (and
>> this is a fellow who was a Canon man until just over a year ago).
>
> who might that be?

I don't think it's proper for me to submit his name here as he doesn't
participate in the usenet groups however if you look around in the
Sigma forum on dpreview over the past week you should be able to find
the post in which he offers this tidbit.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On 2008-02-22 20:40:19 -0700, nospam <nospam.RemoveThis@nospam.invalid> said:

> In article <47bf7195$0$19527$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
> Tuthill <tuthill.RemoveThis@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:
>
>>> Well, look at how incompetent Sigma is at creating a digital camera
>>> from scratch.
>>
>> I think they've done pretty well considering they've only been in the
>> dslr business for around 6 years.
>
> they've done pretty well??
>
> sigma's market share is nonexistant (under 0.1%). they can't be making
> any money on the cameras, especially with the recent firesale prices.
> pentax, olympus and sony (including konica/minolta) have been in the
> dslr business for about the same amount of time and they're doing a
> *lot* better.

Yeah, but pentax, olympus and sony didn't have to reinvent the wheel
and Sony just bought KM's technology for the most part. There's no
doubt they all have a head start in the marketing end also as their
brand is much better known than Sigma. I'd guess that your average
digital shooter has very little knowledge of Sigma unless they shoot
with a dslr (of course the same would appy to Tamron and Tokina). It
seems that unless you produce consumer P&S you aren't going to garner
much of the dslr market. I think that's probably due to both brand
recognition and the natural upgrade path (ie. if you start out with a
Canon P&S chances are your first dslr will be a Canon).

>
>> How's the Nikon/Canon/Pentax
>> compacts with dlsr sized sensor developments coming along?
>
> there are rumours that nikon is working on one (and olympus ought to be
> if they aren't already), but the market for such a camera is small,
> which is why nobody (other than sony and that one was a dud) has
> bothered so far. current compact digicams are 'good enough.'

It certainly appears that Sigma has a foot up on them in that small
market though. I don't recall seeing a new camera introduction that
has garnered as much talk as the DP1. We're seeing a lot more new
names showing up in the dpreview forum who have, or are entertaining,
picking up an SD14 as a result of curiousity over the DP1 and most who
do seem to quite happy with the IQ.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

In article <47bfa098$0$31375$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com>, Michael
Tuthill <tuthill.RemoveThis@nospamshaw.ca> wrote:

> Yeah, but pentax, olympus and sony didn't have to reinvent the wheel
> and Sony just bought KM's technology for the most part.

reinvent what wheel? sigma built off their film bodies just as pentax
and k/m did. olympus did reinvent the wheel with 4/3rds with a totally
new body/lens mount/frame size.

> There's no
> doubt they all have a head start in the marketing end also as their
> brand is much better known than Sigma. I'd guess that your average
> digital shooter has very little knowledge of Sigma unless they shoot
> with a dslr (of course the same would appy to Tamron and Tokina).

many people have heard of sigma lenses. virtually nobody knows that
they make cameras.

> I don't recall seeing a new camera introduction that
> has garnered as much talk as the DP1.

where were you when the nikon d3 and d300 came out?

> We're seeing a lot more new
> names showing up in the dpreview forum who have, or are entertaining,
> picking up an SD14 as a result of curiousity over the DP1 and most who
> do seem to quite happy with the IQ.

now compare that to how many new names are showing up in the nikon and
canon forums.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On Feb 23, 6:40 am, nospam <nos... RemoveThis @nospam.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <7f0debdf-6ae5-4fd2-908f-69b2f669b... RemoveThis @z17g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
>
> acl <achilleaslazari... RemoveThis @yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Look I don't want to argue, but think about it. I have a canon lens
> > and a camera. I can send stuff into the contacts and see what comes
> > out. This way, I can map out how the lens reacts (the "protocol"). If
> > the lens knows how to do it, I can map it out. Similarly for the body.
> > Thus, I can exactly emulate the protocol.
>
> you can emulate only what you can detect. unless you spend a *lot* of
> time testing every possible combination of commands, you might miss a
> few. or, it could be a timing tolerance issue. maybe other factors
> too.

As I said, it's been done (although I don't remember where I saw it so
feel free to not belive me). And really, think about it: can there
possibly be anything there that you can't detect? Think. And
significantly more complicated things were reverse engineer by geeks
of my acquaintance for no good reason other than because they were
there. So it's not a lot of time. But maybe it is a tolerance issue or
something, I don't know.

Anyway, one way or another, there are compatibility problems, so I
don't know.

>
> > The only thing I can think of is that because each lens sends an
> > identifier (which does happen), newer bodies may implement things in
> > different ways but when they detect an older lens switch to the old
> > protocol.
>
> that's another thing that sigma gets wrong. they reuse rom chips, and
> some lenses identify themselves as something other than what they
> really are.

Well that I find as hard to believe as the licensing thing. Do you
really thing they'd reuse a chip in a new expensive lens they take at
a show? I mean, how much do these chips cost? Something else is going
on. This could well be gross incompetence, of course. I just find it
hard to believe (but who knows?).
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On Feb 23, 4:21 pm, "David J. Littleboy" <davi....DeleteThis@gol.com> wrote:
> "acl" <achilleaslazari....DeleteThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Anyway, one way or another, there are compatibility problems, so I
> > don't know.
>
> (The following is all "to the best of my knowledge" based on not having
> noticed any complaints of problems on the Canon forums in a long time.)
>
> Well, no. There _have been_ compatibility problems. Past tense.
>
> As I understand it, there haven't been compatibility problems for a long
> time, and the only lenses that had problems were ones that have been long
> since discontinued.
>
> Have I missed more recent problems? What's the most recent Sigma lens that
> has failed to work on a newer body?

Well the last I heard about (for Nikon) was when the d200 came out
(late 2005) and sigma HSM lenses wouldn't focus when using the af-on
button. This was fixed after the first firmware upgrade by Nikon,
though, so I strongly suspect it was some kind of bug. I haven't heard
anything since (but it's not the sort of thing I worry about so
maybe).

>
> And even the claim that Sigma doesn't license the Canon interface sounds
> like an urban myth.

Yes, that's what it sounds like to me too.

>
> Of course in this case the Sigma's excessive CA makes it a lens to be
> avoided. Especially since the Tamron is so much better and cheaper. (The
> similar Canon lens is almost three times the price (list price in Japan) of
> the Tamron.)
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

In article
<47275714-50f9-4371-86e5-cee3156cb275.RemoveThis@s37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
acl <achilleaslazarides.RemoveThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Well that I find as hard to believe as the licensing thing. Do you
> really thing they'd reuse a chip in a new expensive lens they take at
> a show? I mean, how much do these chips cost? Something else is going
> on. This could well be gross incompetence, of course. I just find it
> hard to believe (but who knows?).

if it's not the entire chip, it's some of the data contained within it.
or maybe they are sending bogus data that gets misinterpreted. they're
clearly doing something not quite right, and it's a pain for users.

sigma 150-500 reports as 18-200 with focal lengths mapped:
<http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1030&message=26630814>

sigma 50-500 reports as 300:
<http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=25741082>

i recall a more in-depth discussion of what is actually happening, but
dpreview's search is currently limited to the last year, and i guess it
was earlier.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma .. 

On Feb 23, 4:11 pm, Chris Savage <spam.goes.h....DeleteThis@devnull.savvo.co.uk>
wrote:
> On 2008-02-22, acl <achilleaslazari....DeleteThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Feb 23, 12:29 am, Chris Savage <spam.goes.h....DeleteThis@devnull.savvo.co.uk>
> > wrote:
> >> On 2008-02-22, acl <achilleaslazari....DeleteThis@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> > On Feb 22, 11:38 pm, "Peter Stavrakoglou" <nto....DeleteThis@optonline.net>
> >> > wrote:
>
> >> >> Sigma does reverse engineer the protocol. Re-chipping is necessary because
> >> >> Canon changes the protocol from time-to-time.
>
> >> > OK but then how come old canon lenses don't need rechipping if the
> >> > protocol's changed?
>
> >> Because Canon has the specification of theprotocol.
>
> >> Sigma could only copy the bits they could see and knew nothing of the
> >> parts that Canon later used.
>
> > The only way I can see that what we observe can occur is that stuff
> > changes in newer bodies but they switch to the old protocol if the
> > lens mounted is in some library (AF lenses transmit codes to the body,
> > at least in Nikons they do). I find this hard to believe. For example,
> > that means that if a lens isn't in the library it's assumed to be of
> > the "new" type and you use the new protocol; but then the lens would
> > either not work on older bodies, or it would also need to have a
> > compatibility mode etc.
>
> > The only way I can make sense of this is if the camera manufacturer
> > does it deliberately to break compatibility. But then again, when the
> > Nikon D200 came out there was a problem with sigma HSM lenses (they
> > did not focus with the af-on button). This was fixed in the first
> > firmware update...
>
> > Anyway. I have no clue what is going on, and don't really want to
> > argue, but what people say simply doesn't make sense. But then again,
> > reality doesn't have to make sense.
>
> Who's arguing? I just tried to answer your question.

Sorry, I just tried to make sure it didn't look I was out for an
argument. Didn't mean to imply you are!

>
> There would be two ways to reverse engineer the lens-body protocol.
>
> 1. Observe signals on the wires and replicate the conversations you see.
> 2. Dump the ROMs, disassemble the codes therein.
>
> 1. Is easy, quick and cheap.
> 2. Is difficult, slow and expensive.
>
> 1. Leaves you open to the possibility of missing stuff that the
> equipment you're analysing doesn't do.

But did you read my other messages? If the current lenses don't do it,
how come they work on newer bodies?

Anyway I think we're starting to go in circles so let's put an end to
this.

> 2. Gives you a better chance of not missing that the equipment you're
> analysing doesn't do.
>
> I'm guessing Sigma went for 1. Just like anybody working to a budget and
> timescale would.
>
> The people you know who have reverse engineered ROMs maybe also had more
> time on their hands than the guys Sigma hired to do the job on the Canon
> mount.
 >> Stay informed about: Which one to buy: Tamron SP 180mm F/3.5 Di Macro or Sigma ..