« on: December 22, 2012, 09:44:58 AM »
In the last 12 to 24 months we've seen an array of new lenses from Tamron and Sigma that seem to be laying down the gauntlet to Canon/Nikon in the area of providing good IQ that perhaps started with the 50/1.4 from Sigma. Why the Sigma 50/1.4? Because it tests better than both the Canon and Nikon equivalents albeit, it is more expensive however when Canon replaces the 50/1.4 with a 50/1.4 IS, the Sigma will be cheaper.
But if we look elsewhere, what do we see?
Sigma's new 35/1.4 delivers better IQ than either Canon or Nikon for substantially less.
Tamron's 24-70/2.8 bests Canon's version 1 and is almost comparable to version 2 at almost half the price.
And so on.
Maybe 5 years ago when there was no alternative to the IQ of Canon's lenses it made sense to have a full kit of Canon lenses but today surely you'd have to ask yourself why you were willing to pay a premium for a different name.
Is the smart shooter now only buying maybe one or two Canon lenses and at least the same if not more 3rd party?