Nikon 24/70 f2.8 or Sigma 24/70 f2.8

Discussion in 'Lens Lust' started by Mike Irish, Aug 27, 2008.

  1. Mike Irish

    Mike Irish

    Jun 14, 2008
    Ireland
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 2, 2008
  2. IQ is better... hands down... especially wide-open sharpness. Colors are different, which you like is preference... I like the warm Sigma colors, many like the cooler Nikkor colors better. Nikkor build quality is far superior... Tokina seems to be the only 3rd party that can come close to pro Nikkor build quality. The Nikkor's AFS will also focus quicker and more quietly than the screw-driven Sigma... I find the Sigma focuses very quickly on a D200 and quickly enough on a D80. I wish sigma would release true HSM version of the 24-70/2.8 EX Macro... I would likely buy it.

    The real question is how much are the performance advantages of the Nikkor (some marginal, some more pronounced) worth to you? For me finances made the decision for me, but for my amatuer needs it would be impossible to justify the cost of the Nikkor regardless. The Sigma is a great lens and definitely a worthy budget alternative to the Nikkor. The Sigma is an EXCELLENT value, especially at around $250 - $300 used... it seems most of Sigmas EX lenses offer this same excellent value (like the 10-20, 15-30, 18-50/2.8 Macro, 55/2.8 Macro, 50-150/2.8 HSM, and 70-200/2.8 HSM).

    One other thing to consider... if you plan on using filters extensively, the Sigma may not be for you. It uses an 82mm filter thread which drives the price of filters WAY up if you can even find the ones you want.
     
  3. Mike Irish

    Mike Irish

    Jun 14, 2008
    Ireland
    Hi Stephen. I tank you for such a thoughtful reply to my query.I think that I will go for the sigma as it is almost 1/3 the price of the Nikon lens. I have just sold my D200 + Nikon 18/70 kit lens and grip so I have some spar lol to splash out on gear. I also have the fab D300. My thoughts are as follows. To get the following sigma lenses, 24/70 f2.8 the 150 f2.8 macro and the 30/1.4. Or should I forget all about the lenses and put the lol toads the D700?

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/mike_irish/
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 2, 2008
  4. Mike, I haven't tired either lens but I have to offer an off-topic comment. I just love your avatar... great shot. Is it you?
     
  5. Mike Irish

    Mike Irish

    Jun 14, 2008
    Ireland
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 2, 2008
  6. What about the Tammy 28-75 f/2.8? Consider?
     
  7. Jefferson

    Jefferson

    33
    Jun 7, 2008
    Belgium
    Hi Mike,
    I fully agree with Stephen.
    Cheers.
     
  8. Mike Irish

    Mike Irish

    Jun 14, 2008
    Ireland
    I haven't even taught of the tamron. I will have a look at this option also.
    Cheers, Saj and Jef
     
  9. The reason I chose the Sigma over the Tamron is that the 4mm wider is far more useful than 5mm longer, especially on DX. Also, the Sigma build is a step up. 82mm filter threads are another downside. One more recommendation, especially if looking to save money, is find a copy of the older 28-70mm f/2.8 EX D DF... the 24-60mm f/2.8 EX DG is also super sharp, maybe sharpest of all of these, as well as the lightest and most compact... but I found its range a bit awkward so I sold it and moved up to the 24-70mm DG. I'm hoping with both Canon and Nikon now having multiple full-frame bodies that Sigma will upgrade this lens to HSM... if they do I might even pay retail price to upgrade.
     
  10. barisaxer

    barisaxer

    278
    Apr 6, 2006
    Albany OR
    I vote for the tamron and have one. Great lens. Had a sigma and got rid of it, may have been a soft copy but thet tamron is much better and closer to the nikon. Have a sigma 150 macro and a sigma 20mm 1.8 and those are keepers at least my copies.