Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Determining a price on a used lens
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="rocketman122" data-source="post: 443999" data-attributes="member: 14443"><p>woah! my first "pro" lens! actually my first sigma lens was the 28-105 2.8-4. then quickly sold that and got the 28-70 EX. I didnt understand why nikon charged $1300 for their 28-70 AFS and thought id rather buy the 28-70 EX for the same price more or less you did. I was shooting 2 years with the gear and thought the IQ was fine from it. till someone asked me if I want to buy an 85 1.4 AIS for cheap. I took it to test. it looked like hell. I shot with it and saw the results and I became very depressed. I now realized what mediocre lenses were sitting in my bag till that moment. </p><p></p><p>this is something many photographers will go through when learning. at first youll learn about compositions and light and then your ego kicks in thinking youre great till something happens (when I got my 85 1,4 AIS or when a pro will tell you your works sucks A** and shows u his work) and youll come down a few notches and reassess your whole situation in photography. then your drive kicks in and the climb to be better goes up again. and so forth.</p><p></p><p>sigma, NEVER, even to this date, has ever made a 24/28-70 2.8 that was a great performer. they all lacked contrast/sharpness wide open. you had to stop it down to 4.5-5 to really get contrasty sharp images and that defeats the purpose for a 2.8 really. </p><p></p><p>the 70-200 2.8 EX HSM was something else. it was sharp from 3.5. the 17-35 2.8-4 was like the 28-70 EX 2.8. soft as hell. I sold mine about 4 years ago. good bye good riddance. </p><p>today though it isnt the case (well wit some of sigmas lenses) those art lenses really are fabulous.</p><p></p><p>I had the sigma 28-70 2.8 EX 4/10 build 5/10</p><p>I had the tokina 28-80 2.8 ATX 6/10 build 8/10</p><p>I have the tamron 28-75 7/10 build 5/10</p><p>I have the nikon 28-70 AFS 8/10 build 7/10</p><p></p><p>I rate this on sharpness first. even the nikon isnt that sharp wide open. but at 4 its razor sharp. the others were not razor sharp at f/4 but acceptable.</p><p>then color and then bokeh. AF speed was bearable on all and all have issues in low light situations. the nikkor is the best and the other 3 just a bit less. flare is not an issue. I like flare at times. CA is average with the top two.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="rocketman122, post: 443999, member: 14443"] woah! my first "pro" lens! actually my first sigma lens was the 28-105 2.8-4. then quickly sold that and got the 28-70 EX. I didnt understand why nikon charged $1300 for their 28-70 AFS and thought id rather buy the 28-70 EX for the same price more or less you did. I was shooting 2 years with the gear and thought the IQ was fine from it. till someone asked me if I want to buy an 85 1.4 AIS for cheap. I took it to test. it looked like hell. I shot with it and saw the results and I became very depressed. I now realized what mediocre lenses were sitting in my bag till that moment. this is something many photographers will go through when learning. at first youll learn about compositions and light and then your ego kicks in thinking youre great till something happens (when I got my 85 1,4 AIS or when a pro will tell you your works sucks A** and shows u his work) and youll come down a few notches and reassess your whole situation in photography. then your drive kicks in and the climb to be better goes up again. and so forth. sigma, NEVER, even to this date, has ever made a 24/28-70 2.8 that was a great performer. they all lacked contrast/sharpness wide open. you had to stop it down to 4.5-5 to really get contrasty sharp images and that defeats the purpose for a 2.8 really. the 70-200 2.8 EX HSM was something else. it was sharp from 3.5. the 17-35 2.8-4 was like the 28-70 EX 2.8. soft as hell. I sold mine about 4 years ago. good bye good riddance. today though it isnt the case (well wit some of sigmas lenses) those art lenses really are fabulous. I had the sigma 28-70 2.8 EX 4/10 build 5/10 I had the tokina 28-80 2.8 ATX 6/10 build 8/10 I have the tamron 28-75 7/10 build 5/10 I have the nikon 28-70 AFS 8/10 build 7/10 I rate this on sharpness first. even the nikon isnt that sharp wide open. but at 4 its razor sharp. the others were not razor sharp at f/4 but acceptable. then color and then bokeh. AF speed was bearable on all and all have issues in low light situations. the nikkor is the best and the other 3 just a bit less. flare is not an issue. I like flare at times. CA is average with the top two. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
Off Topic
Determining a price on a used lens
Top
