Paralysis by analysis

Golf007sd

ummm... you know you can use the Sigma Art as a manual focus lens, right? It's still almost as good a manual focus lens as the Zeiss at less than 1/4 the cost, right?

You took the words out of my Mouth. Arrrrr.

WestEndBoy

ummm... you know you can use the Sigma Art as a manual focus lens, right? It's still almost as good a manual focus lens as the Zeiss at less than 1/4 the cost, right?

That assumes that I would want to use that particular lens as a manual focus lens. If I am buying an AF lens, I likely have an AF application in mind.

And what will the resale value be on an AF lens where AF no longer works?

I do like manual focus lenses, but normal or wider. I am not sure I see myself shooting portraits with a manual focus lens (though I am sure I will try it someday).

WestEndBoy

Yeah, seriously. I certainly acknowledge (and admire) what Sigma has achieved with their Art lineup. I just can’t get past the unease that I feel. Possibly because I am not sure that the “off-chance” is really an “off-chance”. However, your other points resonate with me with little or no hesitation – well, I am not sure about a Nikon lenses being worthless in 10 – 15 years, but I am quibbling.

There is another point that I am thinking about as well. As Pistnbroke demonstrates, there are other people that feel the same unease. If they come to this site to address that, they will see one side of the argument, but not the other. I think our “customers” are better served if they see both and this motivates me to express a contrary opinion when I have one.

Perhaps a thread addressing this point? Or perhaps we already have one? Moderators?

Golf007sd

@WestEndBoy: No need to start a new topic. This is all well within the scope of the conversation.

I for one will not lose any sleep in what might work and might not work 10 years down the line or what the re-sale value of an item I own. I do not sell my gear...I collect them.

If an individual does not feel confident in a particular gear, he or she is well within their right to express their concern and share those thought with does in our community. I personally welcome them....it adds flavor; so long as it is done with respect.

I thank you both...WestEndBoy & PitchBlack for expressing your points-of-view respectfully.

Cheers....

Pistnbroke

Just to be clear as there are all levels of readers. The sigma lens worked fine 18-200 and 18-270 < 6m old) but the LC D display would not go below 60 seconds this reduced battery life and if review image was on it was always 60 sec. Sigma told me it was a "feature" and could not fix it . Now the D7100 was fine with 10-20mm and an old 17-35 fx but I had to buy new Nikon lenses . Nikon are certainly on the warpath with batteries and 3rd party grips via firmware . Its never that they dont work but they dont work 100%. I never upgrade the firmware if everything is working for me.

donaldejose

Nikon has a very strong track record on keeping lenses "legacy;" meaning usable for decades. Third party manufactures do not. However, at age 67 I may not be alive for decades or if I am I may not be able to hold a camera steady enough to shoot with it. But I guess there will always be tripods and there will be better VR over the decades! Just noting that when think of usability of lenses for the long term there are a few other considerations for some people, such as age.

Another consideration is technology. Yes, good glass lasts and lasts. But technology changes very fast these days. High megapixel sensors and recent lenses designed for them has moved FX to the edge of medium format in many ways (DxOMark rates many FX sensors above many MF sensors now). 10 years from now we will be shooing with camera's/lenses we can hardly envision today and we may not care that a $900 Sigma Art lens no longer works with the latest and greatest Nikon body because we want to use a much better lens which has come out in those 10 years anyway. I think "legacy" ability is less important today than it was decades ago.

Conclusion: If you are a heavy user just buy what you want to use today with the body you are currently shooting with and shoot, shoot, shoot. In 4 years you most likely will change bodies (D820?) and in another 4 years you will likely change again so in 8 years you will be using a body two generations advanced (D830?) and by 10 years there will be a newer-better lens out which you will want to use anyway. So if your 2014 Sigma Art no longer works with the D830, you won't really care.

WestEndBoy

Have I seen your photo on PAD? Are you kidding!. I lingered over it as I do with all of your images!

I was not really able to tell how sharp it was (is there a way to download a high resolution file), but I assume it is damn sharp.

If I was a professional like you, likely shooting 300-400 hundred thousand shots per year, I would not worry about how long a lens lasts. I am sure your 50 1.4 Art has paid for itself long ago. In terms of image quality, it is certainly the best 50 money will buy at the moment (are you listening Nikon?).

And Golf, I certainly here you too. I imagine that I may never sell a lens too (I doubt it will be worth the hassle). But I want to pop an older lens on a new camera and have it work. In that scenario, I am not going to bother getting it fixed if it doesn't. I will just feel cheated. Regarding re-sale value, as I said I probably won't bother. However, there are lots of people that read these forums without commenting that do sell their lenses. My comments are for their benefit. I always remember that when commenting, so I may make a point that is not too important "to me".

For me, I am of two minds:

1.
I like nice things that work. It upsets me when they don't. I am paying a premium not only for image quality, but reliability and hassle free maintenance.

2.
I am actually a heavy shooter for a non-pro. My 15 month old D800 has almost 100,000 shots on it. So maybe I should start thinking like a pro in this regard. A lens being out of commission for six months while Sigma reverse engineers the D900 in 2016 (with 48 megapixels and 11fps - yay!, but $9,000 - gulp!) or worst case, I use the lens for a paperweight perhaps should not worry me too much (But what if my entire collections is Sigma? If Sigma fleshes out their line, is a pro prepared to accept that risk?)

And their is one thing that I cannot get out of my mind, but haven't mentioned. If Nikon wanted, they could produce a 35 and 50 that would have pro-build and better image quality than the Sigma (I suspect that they cheated on the 58 1.4G and make a very large markup) - say 1.4G version 2. If Nikon lets this slide for more than a few years, I am going to be annoyed with Nikon. In the meantime, I am more focusing on 85 or longer and my MF lenses are fine because when I shoot landscapes, I am shooting at 5.6-11. I am patient regarding the wide to normal focal range.

So per your request Pitchblack, I shall reconsider.

WestEndBoy

Nikon has a very strong track record on keeping lenses "legacy;" meaning usable for decades. Third party manufactures do not. However, at age 67 I may not be alive for decades or if I am I may not be able to hold a camera steady enough to shoot with it. But I guess there will always be tripods and there will be better VR over the decades! Just noting that when think of usability of lenses for the long term there are a few other considerations for some people, such as age.

Another consideration is technology. Yes, good glass lasts and lasts. But technology changes very fast these days. High megapixel sensors and recent lenses designed for them has moved FX to the edge of medium format in many ways (DxOMark rates many FX sensors above many MF sensors now). 10 years from now we will be shooing with camera's/lenses we can hardly envision today and we may not care that a $900 Sigma Art lens no longer works with the latest and greatest Nikon body because we want to use a much better lens which has come out in those 10 years anyway. I think "legacy" ability is less important today than it was decades ago.

Conclusion: If you are a heavy user just buy what you want to use today with the body you are currently shooting with and shoot, shoot, shoot. In 4 years you most likely will change bodies (D820?) and in another 4 years you will likely change again so in 8 years you will be using a body two generations advanced (D830?) and by 10 years there will be a newer-better lens out which you will want to use anyway. So if your 2014 Sigma Art no longer works with the D830, you won't really care.

I largely agree with your point, though I feel you may be too optimistic with the rate of technological improvement in lens design (but really hope you are too pessimistic!!). Lens design does not benefit from the same technology growth curve as sensors, which bye the way, is also slowing down. You just might get six or seven years out of the D810.

dkookymonster

I thank you both...WestEndBoy & PitchBlack for expressing your points-of-view respectfully.

+1 to that. It's refreshing to see a coherent, knowledgeable and respectful dialogue in a web forum. That's getting pretty rare these days. ...and, here's that newb showing...I had no idea Sigma even offered a mount conversion service. Regarding the pace of technology change, seems to me we've hit some level of plateau in terms of sensor technology given just about every model of DSLR we've seen in the past year or so is basically an iteration of different existing features of different cameras. "Moore's Law...is it finally leveling out? News at 11."....okay, that sounded way funnier in my head as Ron Burgundy.

Ironheart

Old news, happened last week.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
http://www.economist.com/news/21589080-golden-rule-microchips-appears-be-coming-end-no-moore

sevencrossing

,,......However, at age 67 I may not be alive for decades or if I am I may not be able to hold a camera steady enough to shoot with it....... In 4 years you most likely will change bodies....

I am also 67 a new body when I am 81, seems an excellent idea

WestEndBoy

I thank you both...WestEndBoy & PitchBlack for expressing your points-of-view respectfully.

+1 to that. It's refreshing to see a coherent, knowledgeable and respectful dialogue in a web forum. That's getting pretty rare these days. ...and, here's that newb showing...I had no idea Sigma even offered a mount conversion service. Regarding the pace of technology change, seems to me we've hit some level of plateau in terms of sensor technology given just about every model of DSLR we've seen in the past year or so is basically an iteration of different existing features of different cameras. "Moore's Law...is it finally leveling out? News at 11."....okay, that sounded way funnier in my head as Ron Burgundy.

I appreciate your thoughts. It is imperative. I am the keynote speaker for ACCA's graduation ceremony in Vancouver next week. I am speaking to their class about the topic and related international study below:

http://www.accaglobal.com/ca/en/discover/news/2011/11/diversity-challlenge.html

My presentation will be why diversity of perspectives, backgrounds, views etc. is an imperative for corporate governance and executive decision making.

I believe that this is applicable to our community on Nikonrumours for all the same reasons.

ThomasHorton

,,......However, at age 67 I may not be alive for decades or if I am I may not be able to hold a camera steady enough to shoot with it....... In 4 years you most likely will change bodies....

I am also 67 a new body when I am 81, seems an excellent idea

I would settle for a new crop body at my age. snicker

henrik1963

The VCRs, The DVD players and even the Blue Ray players are fast becoming junk. Who knows what we use in a decade. Buy what you like now. But know that whatever you buy now may be old school in a decade.

Harsh words to someone who is about to drop $5K on gear - but probably true words.

ThomasHorton

What is replacing Blue Ray?

Crikey, we just got through buying blue ray players and getting movies in that format in my house.

sevencrossing

What is replacing Blue Ray?

In the uk online suppliers such as Amazon Instant Video

henrik1963

@ThomasHorton: I can't remember the last time I used my Blue Ray player - I keep it just i case :-)

I have a computer and an Apple TV hooked up to my TV - I use Netflix, podcasts and a digital antenna.

Even Flow TV is fast getting old around here. The same goes for cable - too expensive for what you get.

ThomasHorton

I like having possession of the disk. Makes it easy to take it somewhere else or play it on a device that does not need connection to the Internets Tubes.

henrik1963

@ThomasHorton: I am old enough to feel the same way. That is why I have a basement full of CDs, DVDs and Blue Ray discs. I think we even have a few VCR tabes.

It is like having a god old film camera - you do not want to get rid of it - but you never use it. Do you consider your old film camera a waste? I dont. And I dont think I will consider my D800 a waste when it becomes to old school to use - a dear memory perhaps.

PB_PM

What is replacing Blue Ray?

You mean you actually bought a Blue Ray player? Those things were passé before they even hit the shelf, online content is the ticket post 2008.

ThomasHorton

Online content is ok... if you are online.

dkookymonster

I finally went and rented the Nikon 80-400G f/4.5 ED VR per the recommendations here and shot it on my D7000...man, that's a great lens. To be transparent, I'd never shot a VR lens before! Ok, so I'm the slow kid on the block, but holy krap...VR, hand-held at 400mm...almost out of light, and I was getting usable shots of stationary items at 1/10 shutter speed (1000 ISO). That amazed me... so..maybe I should get out of the house more. Kind regards for all the great advise above.

ThomasHorton

400mm at 1/10th handheld? That's impressive.

dkookymonster

Far from impressive: they were shots of hedge apples laying on the ground. I'll consider myself "impressive" when I get a usable shot at 400 mm of anything moving...anything moving...at all. Seriously though, I had no idea VR essentially 'froze' the view once AF locked on. Pretty cool feature...for someone like me who has never used it.

ThomasHorton

Well for a shakey guy like me, even handholding on a stationary object at that shutter speed is impressive.