CGA, einfo tech, sigma lens

Forums › Off topic › CGA, einfo tech, sigma lens - what gives?

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#140869 23-Feb-2014 08:55

Hey the qeustion here is whether i have a cga case?

Bought a $716 sigma 18-250 3.5-6.3 lens for canon from einfo.co.nz on feb 2010

Around last year it had a problem.
Google yesterday discovers i have aperture failure (diaphragm will not work giving rise to overexposed pictures on a bright day, needing very high shutter speed to compensate for failed aperture control.

So ... Live with it, or try cga?
No i havent asked einfo, presmably they'd laugh at me the lens being 4 years old

1 | 2

628 posts

Ultimate Geek

#992659 23-Feb-2014 08:59

What's the 'reasonably' expected lifetime of the product?

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#992661 23-Feb-2014 09:05

any normal person would expect a $700 lens to last longer than 4 years

kenkeniff

628 posts

Ultimate Geek

#992663 23-Feb-2014 09:16

nathan: any normal person would expect a $700 lens to last longer than 4 years

I'm 'normal' but don't know anything about camera lens' hence why I ask (e.g. I wouldn't expect a $700 phone to last longer than 4 years).

Is it a known issue with the model?

Could try going direct to the manufacturer; if they wont deal with you directly at least if they acknowledge the issue it will give you something to go back to einfo tech with to say "it is a manufacturing issue, failed within expected lifetime of product and falls within CGA".

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#992672 23-Feb-2014 09:52

wouldn't it also depend if the failure was due to manufacturing or damaged

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

nathan

5695 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#992675 23-Feb-2014 09:55

kenkeniff:
nathan: any normal person would expect a $700 lens to last longer than 4 years

I'm 'normal' but don't know anything about camera lens' hence why I ask (e.g. I wouldn't expect a $700 phone to last longer than 4 years).

Is it a known issue with the model?

Could try going direct to the manufacturer; if they wont deal with you directly at least if they acknowledge the issue it will give you something to go back to einfo tech with to say "it is a manufacturing issue, failed within expected lifetime of product and falls within CGA".

I do think a $700 phone should last longer than 4 years

unless you drop it smash it, damage it etc

scuwp

3886 posts

Uber Geek

#992677 23-Feb-2014 10:00

I will defer to more qualified voices on photography equipment. My lay opinion would be that 4 years isn't great but a CGA claim is probably pushing it just a little bit. If I got 4 years out of an electronic device I wouldn't be too disappointed.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

kenkeniff

628 posts

Ultimate Geek

#992680 23-Feb-2014 10:03

nathan: ...

I do think a $700 phone should last longer than 4 years

unless you drop it smash it, damage it etc

Product expected lifetime ≠ Your expected usage

Sure you may still be rocking your old Nokia 3210 and expected to last thus far but doesn't mean that Nokia must warrant it past 3-4 years.

In product lifecycle / accounting (depreciation) terms, your [Nokia 3210] is dead.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#992681 23-Feb-2014 10:03

I don't remember damaging it ...

Yeah who knows ... I'm one that likes to shy away from hassles and just gathering opinion on whether it's worth pursuing cga.

The suggestion about contacting manufacturer was great but from experience they like to make it as hard as possible. Harder than the retailer. What more I think it was drop shipped by einfo.

Lesson learnt re sigma lenses :)

kenkeniff

628 posts

Ultimate Geek

#992683 23-Feb-2014 10:08

See here: https://www.ird.govt.nz/calculators/keyword/depreciation/calculator-depreciation-rate-finder.html

And here: http://www.ird.govt.nz/calculators/keyword/depreciation/calculator-depreciation.html

To calculate the expected zero-value lifetime of your product in accounting terms.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#992685 23-Feb-2014 10:13

joker97: Hey the qeustion here is whether i have a cga case?

Bought a $716 sigma 18-250 3.5-6.3 lens for canon from einfo.co.nz on feb 2010

Around last year it had a problem.
Google yesterday discovers i have aperture failure (diaphragm will not work giving rise to overexposed pictures on a bright day, needing very high shutter speed to compensate for failed aperture control.

So ... Live with it, or try cga?
No i havent asked einfo, presmably they'd laugh at me the lens being 4 years old

By way of comparable evidence, Nikon lenses sold in the USA and Canada have a 5 year manufacturer warranty so they presumably believe 5 years is a reasonable period. I see no reason why that period should change just because you are in another country.

However I have no idea as to the comparable build quality between Nikon and Sigma and most Nikon lenses are more expensive.

I'd say it is worth a go, surely?

gzt

17157 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#992688 23-Feb-2014 10:19

If you have the time to go through small claims you may have some partial success, but don't expect anything from walking into the store.

Personally I'd just look up the main NZ service agent for Sigma. A repair might be cost effective and if not possible they might just offer you a sweet deal on a replacement.

By the way, apart from the failure, was it a good/adequate lens in practice?

insane

3240 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#992694 23-Feb-2014 10:33

I've owned that same lens and to be honest in terms of build quality it's a bit like a toy compared to Canon L or Nikkor lenses.

Having said that, if you look after your lenses like I do then there is no reason why it shouldn't last 10 years. Good quality lenses don't loose value much over time as they do typically last past 10 years, just look at lenses on TradeMe and their going prices. If they didn't last or weren't expected to last the asking prices would reflect this, but the opposite is almost true.

Batman

Mad Scientist
29769 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#992695 23-Feb-2014 10:37

One lens works for wide to zoom, not super wide, not ultra zoom, but enough for an average person 95% of the time. That's about where it stops.

Autofocus crap, 70% of the time inaccurate
Soft ish pictures (never more than a kit lens or a any other lens under 1k so it's comparable)
Acceptable barrel distortion, best of all the comparable lenses

I use it because i don't want to shell 3k for a 5d mk 3 with 3k 50mm 1.2 3k 70-200mm 2.8 IS 3k 16-40mm

My other lens is 50mm 1.8 from amazon for US40 lol
And. $10 tradme macro adaptor

Don't get me wrong as a utilitarian it's the best $700 i spent.

Umm ... Till the aperture failure ... No more sigmas

insane

3240 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#992699 23-Feb-2014 10:56

When I had that lens I had a 400D, so unless I was using MAX ISO I could never get the shutter speed high enough to take crisp-ish photos without a tripod. Any lens with a huge focal range is going to be average at the two extremes anyway.

Sigma 24-70 f2.8 on the other hand is a very well built lens which does take very nice photos. Better on FF as 24 on crop sensor is quite narrow.

I think you have a case though, I'm sure sigma direct is your best bet having seen a warranty claim situation unfold in the einfo store... Wasn't pretty.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#992713 23-Feb-2014 11:43

I'm a bit like you joker and just tend to accept it after that much time but its worth a try as you never know.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

1 | 2