Which Sigma lenses do you own?

Here's another DP2Merrill from Mesa Verde. I had to drop the quality of the jpeg from qual12 to quality 6 to fit under the size limits of this site. That's doing the photo an injustice, so I'll try a 'half size' jpeg. Only a half size qual 11 is under 4MB.The original size, qual 12 is really amazing in its fine detail. Ruins of 13th century walls and buildings are everywhere in Mesa Verde and you can see many in the full size of this photo. Honestly the 'best' lenses may be those that were custom developed for the DP Merrill and Quattro series cameras. I'll eventually get a full album of Mesa Verde and vicinity photos online, at large sizes on flickr

Thank you Johan and David for your feedback.

I'm struggling currently to where to turn myself for post-processing. I used to use Lightroom when it was a perpetual licensed product. I did not subscribed since, hence my old version has no auto lenses correction for my latest ones. I tried Affinity a little bit, checked what is available in ON1, but am a bit at loss where to put the money for the next years to come...

Does SPP apply lens corrections to the images?

there is an option to select lens corrections in spp but i never really notice it doing anything. anyone else have an opinion?

All F-mount:
500 f4 OS Sport: Better than my 500 VR G was...just as good as the 500 FL in every way and great with tc's. World-class lens here.
180 f2.8 OS macro Made me forget my 200 f4 AFD...and that's saying something. It's also amazing with tc's...even the 2x. Another world-class lens.
100-400 OS Nice compliment to the 500PF in a kayak. Very good optics. It's not great wide, but it's very good. It is great closed-down about 2/3. AF is good...OS is meh.
Previously:
105 f2.8 EX macro Great lens...not fast...didn't care
180 f3.5 EX macro Very good lens, but as I gained more experience with higher quality glass, I realized it wasn't great. It was good though.
400 f5.6 Telemacro Never though this was as good as many said. Needed to be at f8 to get good quality.
70-200 f2.8 HSM Very good in many ways, but not great at 2.8 or with TCs. I use a 70-200VR II...it's better in every way, but at the time the Sigma was a fantastic value.
300 f2.8HSM Not great. It was not usable (to my liking) at 2.8, decent by 3.5, good at f4, and very good-excellent by 5.6, but who buys an f2.8 lens to have to use it at f4 and smaller. Much smaller and lighter the Nikon counterparts, but not even close in IQ to the point that non-photographers could take the Pepsi challenge and tell the difference.

I guess you wouldn't notice much of a difference except on lenses where the corrections are mandatory and hence not possible to turn off anyway. I'd appreciate to make that decision myself, but Sigma considers them part of the lens design for DG DN lenses.

I also have the 85mm 1.4 DG DN Sony mount. It’s my only Sigma lens at this time and I’m very impressed with it.

That's hardly all of them! 30 Art, 35 Art, and 135 Art, to begin with, then we have the 105/2.8 macro (and several other macros)!
And then we have the long zooms, like the 100-400 C, and the two 150-600s, to mention a few.

+1, and quite lucky with the P mode selected and the Evaluative exposure metering ...

This is no longer the truth,
A while ago the 150-600 broke and have been looking for a replacement.
Have thought about the new Canon RF 200-80 0mm F6.3-9 IS USM but that would be limiting our tele options on our analog Canon Eos bodies.
We just ordered a SIGMA 60-600mm F4.5-6.3 DG OS HSM | Sports (Canon EF mount)
It took a while because the 60-600 has also a limited availability

APO Tele Converter 1.4X EX. (Might have bought a 50 and 85 f/1.4 Art lens if I had not compared them with Zeiss Otus.)