LOL. If the lens is good performer and the price is adequate, people will buy it, regardless of brand. Too bad , they have to buy two (if they like it) to use it with Sigma and EF or Nikon mounts if they are thinking of existing system and SD1.
How does that affect image quality?
Excellent point, and thanks for the heads up; there's no reason the lens should look like it's been in a war zone (unless it has been). And, it's only from owner reports like yours that we get to learn about those things; it wouldn't show up in the initial lens reviews. The lens isn't cheap (even if it's not OEM), and Sigma should improve the lens covering for durability.
As can be seen from my pic, its not even scratched .
Not to me (but all my lenses are OEM, except for a 14mm Sigma that I bought 15 years ago, that still has a perfectly-intact covering on the lens barrel), and probably not to a number of others reading this thread.
Of course (although some may not initially realize that you're referring to the covering on the lens barrel, and not the coating applied to the optics ). And, it will significantly affect resale value. Besides, who wants to pull out a lens that looks like it's been run through a clothes dryer, and why should he have to?
So, why hasn't it been?
That's great news!
--
That's good new Tom.
It has a two-part hood - a conventional hood for full-frame users and an extender to shade more of the lens for APS-C users.
