Yes, it will fit.
Definitely get the kit lens too. It is a bargain and very good (probably better than your 35-80) and the focal length range is much better for general photography on the XT (will correspond to
This is definitely not correct.
I sell cameras for a living. Third party lenses often need rechipping after a number of years.
Lucky you...
That's not what I've been reading in the last two years in this and many other foruns and info sources...
That's a risk, all right. But Canon did that too, when they changed from FD to EOS mount. How did the old FD users felt at that time? No one knows the future, sure, but that doesn't mean that Sigma (and Tamron, and Tokina) didn't learnt their lesson.
I never heard of Tamron or Tokina rechipping their lenses. I know there are some errors with some lenses (as well as with Canon lenses!) but it seems to me these cases happen in faulty lenses or lenses with some kind of electric contacts malfunction (or lack of cleaning).
That's the point of third party lenses. If they weren't cheaper, who would buy them? Not me, for sure.
I'm sorry, but I never said that rechipping isn't an issue. I said that older Sigma lenses don't work on recent EOS cameras and that Sigma can't rechip them anymore. Of course , this is an issue! And I didn't say that buying third party lens is without a risk - the reference to the 'old Sigma lenses' problem is enough to make one think about this. What I wanted to imply in my post is that you can't judge the part for the whole (Sigma for all third party brands and older Sigma lenses for all Sigma lenses).
Likewise.
Conan
Well it's a malfuction when the lens stops working, but it's typically a compatibility issue when it works on old bodies but not on new ones. Canon has, in my experience, fixed those errors mostly for free, even on out of production equipment.
Typically, the previous generation Sigma lenses don't work on the newest bodies and are not rechippable as they are out of production. If Sigma is smart they will maintain service for at least their current EX lenses when they go out of production.
Neither Canon nor Tamron have ever confirmed that to my knowledge, but that seems to be the concensus among the public. Some people have even suggested that the really basic cheap kit lenses are made by Tamron, but I've never really checked into that to see if it might be true or not.
I can't be absolutely certain which lenses cause problems as we've never logged which ones do and don't; it's not really that important. But generally, we're dealing with the cheaper consumer lenses when it comes to third party lenses so it shows up mostly on things like 70-300s and 28-300s and lenses like that; I think I've only seen a problem with a few Tokina 28-70s on some of the older eye-control focus cameras if memory serves me correctly (flash exposure problems I seem to recall). However, Tamron has evidently been recently telling some of their SP and teleconverter customers that AF is not gauranteed to work properly on digitals due to the lens coatings on some of their older equipment. I'm not entirely sure what that means as far as AF accuracy, but to blame the coatings seems rather odd and evasive to me (of course you can't rechip a coating).
Thank you for pointing out how being correct and being not correct works. I have to conclude that you assume I'm lying about this or deliberatly trying to mislead people for some reason. Perhaps you would have been more comfortable if I had said that given enough time third party lenses are known to occasionally have compatibility issues (which would be a somewhat silly statement to make as given enough time any statement can seem reasonable). But really I would love it if people would buy third party lenses by a large margin; it would make sales people and retailers tons of money.
Maybe so maybe not, I could make a lot more money doing something else, but I sort of like my job.Lucky you...
I've been in sales for nearly a decade so I've seen the whole transition into digital more or less. Lenses made within the last two years are pretty good when it comes to compatibility with current cameras.
That was 20 years ago and has helped allow Canon to dominate the sports and photojournalism market. People were upset about the switch, but it didn't take long for EOS users to see what a monumentally beneficial switch that was.
Well, we're not really talking about a malfunctioning lens; it's when one lens works fine on older bodies and doesn't on newer bodies. The 85/1.2L would be an example of a Canon lens that had some compatibility issues on some newer bodies, but I think Canon was servicing those lenses sometimes for free.
Well, some of them don't exist in the OEM lineup, and some are better in certain ways than OEM lenses. So there's some other reasons to buy them besides price.That's the point of third party lenses. If they weren't cheaper,
who would buy them? Not me, for sure.
Which as I said I've had experience with these issues involving other third parties as well. I felt that the gist of what you had said "transmits the (wrong) idea" about the third parties; I should have been a little more clear.
Indeed.
