[Arthur Macmillan]

Regarding using Canon or other glass: non-Canon glass never satisfied me, I just love the way Canon L glass renders images, especially the primes. I am not a fanboy per se, I'll recommend anything to anybody depending on budget and preference.

I do have specific preferences myself, however, f.e., I do not like how Zeiss and Voigtländer lenses render at all, and I have tried very many of those. Just not my style.

 

Kind regards, Wim

 

This is the kind of comment I am after!  For a long time I relied on Tamron SP glass because of price.  But as soon as I tried Canon L glass, it was very solid and very pleasing.  Currently I have all of 3 L-lenses. 

 

Yet there are intangibles.  I got the Voigtlander APO Lanthar 90mm F/3.5 SL-2, and I just love it!  It is a joy to use.  I think it has something like 270 degrees of smooth as silk focus ring.  I'm not the greatest with manual focus, but I'd say my keeper ratio with this lens is pretty good.  Maybe even 100%.  The rendering is not nearly as good as my 70-200L.  And though that is a zoom lens, I consider it to render better than any of my other lenses.

 

But in general, your words pull me pack a little from the Sigma Fever that is spreading.  Has Sigma really slayed the Red Ring Kings?  I have read some reviews state that one of the Sigma Art lenses was the best lens they have every used, bar none.  Big words!