Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 or Nikon 24-105mm f/4 VR?

[nickzou]

So ever since I sold my D80, I haven't had a standard walk around zoom lens. I've been using my 50mm f/1.4 and it has been pretty decent but sometimes I need something wider and I just don't have to room to back up. So I was looking at these two. Since the Nikon 24-70mm is out of my price range I was thinking of the Sigma alternative. But there's also the 24-105mm VR on the Nikon side which is also reasonably priced. Which would be the better choice?

 

[ghache]

Sigma 24-70 is a good fast lens but its not alot longuer than 50mm. have you considered the 24-120 F4 VR ?

 

[nickzou]

Actually that's what I meant by the second lens. I dunno where I got 105mm from.

 

[sierramister]

I use the Sigma 24-70 with HSM as my walk around lens. Hands down sharp, fast, best autofocus lens I have.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

This is my personal opinion, but I still fail to really see the point of 24-70 lenses for my own needs using DX. Specially as I can simply step forwards or step backwards in this range.

The 24-70 is a jack of some trades but a master of none on DX. Partly due to the crop factor! Why not just get a wide angle lens and a 35 1.8? Then in my opinion you have two lenses that are great at what they do! A wide angle lens with give you wide angle shots which the 24-70 is not capable of doing due to the crop factor, 24mm is 36mm on DX. And 2.8 is quite a limiting DOF when you can have a 35mm which is a 1.8. As you say you already have a 50mm 1.4 which is a great addition aswell.

You want telephoto, buy a telephoto. Nikon makes some amazing value telephoto lenses as already discussed. The 24-120 F4 sounds like a great lens, but again it's best put on an FX camera again IMO due to the crop factor and not to mention the fact it's only an F4. I just think your needs could be served better!

 

[nickzou]

That's exactly what I'm looking for; a general purpose lens. I have the 70-300mm VR, that's my primary telephoto.

The crop factor is a mute point in this discussion because it applies to all my lenses. I have a D7k, everything is going to be cropped. My 50mm f/1.4 is cropped, my 24mm f/2.8 is cropped, I know this zoom will be cropped but I want something that is wider than my 50mm f/1.4 cropped. 24mm cropped is still wider than 50mm cropped. And switching lenses just to get one or two shots is highly inconvenient when you are walking around. What I'm saying is that I don't need 24mm to actually be 24mm, just wider than 50mm.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

Maybe the 24-70 will suit you then, its heavy though. Surely, you have considered the 17-55? Thats a much more suitable lens on DX in my mind.

 

[Trever1t]

I dunno about you but I like a walk around lens that allows me to get from wide angle to short telephoto so I don't need to carry a big bag of lenses with me. The 24-70 is my walk around on my FX body but like mentioned it's FOV is not wide on a DX body.

The 17-55 is a great lens and about perfect for you but used still run in the $900 range around here, so probably not in your budget as described. Personally I'd rather wait and save for the real nice glass than buy something less than ideal cheaper.

 

[nickzou]

So I ended up getting the Nikon 28-80mm f/3.3-5.6 G. I am very happy! And it was wayyy cheaper than either of these two lenses.

 

[KmH]

I really like Nikon's 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.

The 1:2 macro capability from 35 mm to 85 mm often comes in real handy when walking around.

 

[nickzou]

I really like Nikon's 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.

The 1:2 macro capability from 35 mm to 85 mm often comes in real handy when walking around.

While that is nice, I got the 28-80mm for 70 dollars so where as this lens is closer to 500.

 

[Nikon_Josh]

I really like Nikon's 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras.

The 1:2 macro capability from 35 mm to 85 mm often comes in real handy when walking around.

While that is nice, I got the 28-80mm for 70 dollars so where as this lens is closer to 500.

Please dont take this the wrong way Nickzou, but you have kinda made a mockery of your own question here if I'm honest!

You've asked everyone for their opinion on two top quality lenses, then you have come on and told us you have bought a variable aperture lens for 70 dollars..

This is a bit like me coming on saying 'sooo which lens should I get the 17-55 Nikon 2.8 or the Nikon 24-70 VR 2.8?' then me coming on a couple of days later and saying 'Oh I realised the Nikon 18-55 VR was a better buy for 20 quid, I'm very pleased with it!'

I mean obviously you were not truly serious about getting a truly high quality zoom in my opinion. Forgive me if I'm wrong though!