TraditionalPhotographer.NET / Cameras & Accessories / 35mm Cameras / Sigma Lenses and Fungus / Latest Posts

RE: Sigma Lenses and Fungus

roteague — Fri, 23 May 2008 22:46:25 GMT

[quote][b]Jorge Gasteazoro (5/22/2008)[/b][hr]I always thought Sigma lenses were the pits, barely above the Quantaray lenses. The one off brand I always thought had great lenses at a good price and with very good quality was Tamron. They were not as cheap as Sigma, but had much better quality and were not as expensive as the Brand lenses like Nikon or Canon.[/quote]

I've never had any real problems with Sigma lenses before, but then again, I'm not the pickest person about such things. The ones I had seemed sharp, it is just this fungus issue that I'm disappointed by. Not to worry, the replacement for these lenses will both be Nikon lenses.

RE: Sigma Lenses and Fungus

Jorge Gasteazoro — Thu, 22 May 2008 12:06:01 GMT

I always thought Sigma lenses were the pits, barely above the Quantaray lenses. The one off brand I always thought had great lenses at a good price and with very good quality was Tamron. They were not as cheap as Sigma, but had much better quality and were not as expensive as the Brand lenses like Nikon or Canon.

RE: Sigma Lenses and Fungus

roteague — Wed, 21 May 2008 23:29:48 GMT

It has been raining here all day, not hard, but enough that it isn't a nice day.

I'm not really up on taking a lens apart; I don't have either the temperament or the tools to do so. I've been looking for an excuse to replace the 105 with one of the new Nikon 105 VR macro lenses. I don't use this lens much, so it isn't too big of a loss, but I'm disappointed it didn't last - in fact, I have a 30 year old Vivitar Series I 70-210 that still has clear glass on it. No problems at all.

RE: Sigma Lenses and Fungus

Toffle — Wed, 21 May 2008 16:03:13 GMT

[quote][b]roteague (5/21/2008)[/b][hr]I've got two Sigma lenses, between 6 and 8 years old,that are infected with fungus, making them worthless. One is a 17-35 and the other a 105 macro. Granted, I live in an area with high-humidity, but I also have an older Nikon 28-200 that is still spotless. From now on, I'm sticking with Nikon lenses.[/quote]

You're right... they're probably worthless. Send them to me. :laugh:

Seriously, lenses that age should not have significant damage from fungus. There are a lot of mixed opinions as to whether such a lens can be cleaned. You really have nothing to lose, so try it. One interesting remedy I've heard... if you can get the elements apart... is to gently rub the affected surface with cold cream and then clean with denatured alcohol. Bear in mind that any lens you disassemble, you also have to re-assemble, which means properly collimating the glass. I wouldn't try that for the first time on a lens I wanted to keep.

Another possible remedy is to leave the lens out in direct sunlight, where the intense UV rays are supposed to kill the fungus.. (but I've also heard that this can discolour glass)

Tell you what... clean them, and then write an article on the process. :) That way we all benefit.

Cheers,

Sigma Lenses and Fungus

roteague — Wed, 21 May 2008 11:32:24 GMT

I've got two Sigma lenses, between 6 and 8 years old, that are infected with fungus, making them worthless. One is a 17-35 and the other a 105 macro. Granted, I live in an area with high-humidity, but I also have an older Nikon 28-200 that is still spotless. From now on, I'm sticking with Nikon lenses.