Originally posted by jstevewhite If you want an eye opening experience, google "USM failure" (canon), "HSM failure" (Sigma), and "SDM failure" (pentax) - and then whatever Nikon calls theirs. There are many people who are just as convinced that the others are failed designs, too.
I did that. Sigma HSM failure vs. Pentax SDM failure is about 5.5:1 according to Google “hits.” But since it’s probably fair to say that less than 1 in 5.5 shooters use Pentax, the numbers would be in Sigma’s favor.
Originally posted by Eruditass Why would you compare a superzoom with professional glass? Completely different league...
Not comparing, per se. Just don't like
anything about my Tamron 18-250 so it doesn’t instill much confidence in any of their products. Also, the reviews I’ve seen of the fast Tamron glass were not so great. The slow/noisy Tamron AF is a turnoff. Conversely, I like my low-end Pentax lenses okay and hoped to buy their faster DA/DA* offerings. That is, until I researched things further.
I really want to want Pentax or Tamron – it’d save me a lot of cash – but in the end, I want dependability, good reach, really good IQ, fast/quiet AF and confidence in the product. If paying 2 to 3 times more for the Sigma array does that for me, oh well (heavy sigh). I don’t want a “great lens for the money” … I just want great lenses – well ... the best I can afford for now, anyway.