DG vs non-DG
joeinmiami
Registered Users Posts: 82 Big grins
Hello there!
I recently purchased a Sigma Bigma, I am very happy with it, but I have a question:
The old Bigmas were non-DG the new ones, like my, are. Basically, besides the manufacturer hype, what is the difference between a non DG lens and a DG lens?
Thanks
Joe :thumb
I recently purchased a Sigma Bigma, I am very happy with it, but I have a question:
The old Bigmas were non-DG the new ones, like my, are. Basically, besides the manufacturer hype, what is the difference between a non DG lens and a DG lens?
Thanks
Joe :thumb
www.jlm-photos.com
0
Comments
They state it's to reduce ghosting and flaring but bigma was never known to have this defect. I've not seen any direct comparisons btwn the non DG and DG version though.
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses.asp
If you read it really carefully you will come to realize that it means almost nothing concrete. It is probably mostly just a marketing term.
As Tee Why indicated, some people noted a difference in coatings that seems to have coincided with the "DG" term, but I don't know that Sigma really ever disclosed any real details. Another thing that was easy to notice with the "DG" designation was an increase in price over the non-DG versions.
At any rate, I have the non-DG version of the "BigMa" and I use it with my Canon dSLRs with no apparent problems.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Thank you Ziggy and Tee Why. I figure that the DG name was simply a marketing tool to make the lens seems more appealing.
Actually I believe the lens is excellent within its limitations. Yes is heavy but that is why you have monopods. Yes is considered to be slow but I only take photos with it in daylight,. Yes it does not have VR but for the price and the fact of the 50-500 reach I do not think you can buy something better.
Thanks
Joe
PD The week after I purchased the lens the price went up by about $150.00
I think it's a great lens.