I also have a Sigma 24 macro, I wouldn't part with. It's perfect companion to my 28-105 and is quite compact. I'm not sure any of this is relevant in the Pentax world. But my point is, with 3rd party glass, there is less chance they will be compatible as the manufacturer moves forward. That hasn't bitten Pentaxians much as fas as I know. But it could. Especially with Pentax moving on to KAF-4.
Pentax may or may not support older Pentax glass as they move forward. With Sigma it's for certain they won't. Pentax aren't going to waste time trying to figure out Sigma's reverse engineering so they can keep them compatible. And there are already many issues with improperly identified lenses that mean I won't buy any more Sigmas. I have files where I don't know what lens I'm looking at except by looking at the local length, and if it's zoom, often you're just screwed.
It's well known that to avoid licensing fees, Sigma used the same lens i.D number on multiple lenses, making accurate software determination of what lens was used impossible in some cases. To be a Sigma user, you have to be OK with that. But even if you're OK with it personally you still have to admit, you can have issues with Sigma gear you would never have with OEM equipment.
I'm looking at an image from said 24mm ƒ2.8 macro lens right now. It says it's taken by a Sigma 30mm ƒ1.4. That's just Mickey Mouse nonsense.
Last edited by normhead; 12-17-2020 at 09:05 AM.