It seems you are new to digital photography...it's good you are here trying to learn.You’re absolutely right – I’ve always had a P&S (Point and Shoot) Canon camera for all of my work just to take pictures of things to put in my graphic design work but recently I’ve become far more serious about my images and upgraded to the Rebel to work with different settings, higher resolutions, and long exposures. I came here to learn via advice from my professor – gravitate to where all the smart people hang out and interact with them with intelligent questions.
Thank you and everyone for merely participating on this forum and contributing to the education of newbies like me and others.
The question I have for you folks now (besides “What do you think their original business model looked like?”) is there ONE must-have Sigma lens for Canon owners?
So this is yet another Sigma bashing thread, big surprise. Yawn...
I hope that comment isn’t directed towards me – I have no opinion for nor against Sigma. I’m only interested in their original business model and how the founders of the company came to the conclusion of making lenses for other camera bodies out of pure academic curiosity.
Here is what Wikipedia has to say about Sigma. I don't think the company began very recently, they have quite a history. Began in 1961.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma_Corporation
I'm not sure there is "one" Sigma lens that every Canon owner must have. Why would there need to be one "must have" lens? Does any camera company produce one "must have" product? And if so, is that a positive attribute for that company? Or would that serve to highlight the company's weaknesses?
Eric, I was not meaning to offend you. But it does seem your thread is meant to question Sigma's motives, implying you are wondering whether they should be in business or not. Naturally the snobs on this forum enjoy bashing third party lens manufacturers as often as they can, with Sigma being their number 1 target. Their thought process is "well, if you can afford to commit to photography, you buy the best, and in general Sigma are not the best camera company or lens manufacturer. Therefore, I'll get my jollies deriding Sigma and anyone who purchases its products, because I'm a forum troll overloaded with testosterone, and I need to point out the inferiority of others so that I can try to fill the hole of hate and inferiority in myself."
A thread like this, is kind of like a net, and the trolls, are the fishermen.
In my opinion, I wonder why more people don't bash Tamron? Their lenses, as a whole, are inferior to Sigma's. They don't even attempt to make cameras. Does that mean they are the inferior company?
Really, how dare Sigma manufacture cameras...the nerve of them. The nerve of anyone who would ever try one. They'd have to be a complete idiot, wouldn't they? What motivates them to be such an idiot?