Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8.. for Nikon, opinions?

[DanBMX]

Hi,

I have been looking at this lens for a while, and feel it would be a nice addition to my kit, however, ive been reading some pretty mixed reviews about it, and was hoping somoene on here could shine a light and highlight issues they might have had, and what works well?

a few questions:

What is f/2.8 like through the full range of the lens, is it still reasonably sharp at 70mm?

Ive heard that parts of the photo can become "soft"? Is this true? and is it throughout the entire range of the lens?

Does it auto focus relatively quick?

Would you reccomend it?

Im looking at this mainly as i cant afford the price Nikon charge for the equvilant lens.

Thanks for the help.
Dan

 

[djacobox372]

I have the af version, it can be a little soft wide open but then even the expensive nikon isnt extremely sharp at f2.8. Sharpness improves quickly as u stop down, f3.5 is a lot better then 2.8 and f4+ is tack sharp

I don't think you'll find a better lens in this range not made by nikon.

 

[DanBMX]

thanks, i did think it would need taking down a few stops, definitely further through the zoom. i read a review saying that when the camera was tilted forward, it rolled through the travel by itself?

has this happened to anyone else?

 

[Texas Parrothead]

How does this compare to the sigma 28-70mm f2.8?

 

[f22mx]

I have this lens and Im very happy using it with my D2X, Im agree with djacobox372, I have found his sweet point at f/5.6 but also, under this f stop the lens works great. I think is the best lens for the money.

 

[daarksun]

If your using full frame that is a great lens. But if it's a crop camera I might look at the Sigma 17-70 f1.8. It's rated extremely well and will give you the wide open shot you may need with the crop.

 

[DanBMX]

if i were to opt for the 17-70 1.8, would it still be just at home on a non crop camera?

 

[zoogirlbc]

Take a look at this one:

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) AF09NII-700 B&H

Gets better reviews than Sigma. I have it and it's everything good that they say it is. Plus it's cheaper and on sale right now. LOVE mine.

 

[MrLogic]

I have the af version, it can be a little soft wide open but then even the expensive nikon isnt extremely sharp at f2.8. Sharpness improves quickly as u stop down, f3.5 is a lot better then 2.8 and f4+ is tack sharp

Actually, the Nikon is sharper wide open than the Sigma is at f/4.

Nikkor AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED (FX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis
Sigma AF 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM (FX) - Review / Test Report - Analysis

 

[Stephen.C]

Take a look at this one:

Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical (IF) AF09NII-700 B&H

Gets better reviews than Sigma. I have it and it's everything good that they say it is. Plus it's cheaper and on sale right now. LOVE mine.

If you're using a DX body, I'd recommend the 17-50 2.8 from Tamron. I have it myself, I really like it, and with the DX it comes out to around 24-70 on a FF.
I was thinking about getting the Tamron 28-75 but I was from the local camera shop that the 17-50 does a better job.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

i'd probably go with the tamron 28-75 if you're looking for a midrange like that. If you're shooting DX, than the Tamron 17-50 is the way to go.