Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rocketman122" data-source="post: 281457" data-attributes="member: 14443">Exactly Rick. thats why I think the nikon offereings are more than fine.&nbsp; its just a 50mm. the 50 is now the new 35 or 85? no its just a must have&nbsp; focal lentgth. the sigma, performance wise looks very capable (although&nbsp; the test was done by sigma so I dont trust it 100%) but anything over&nbsp; $600 and I think its just not logical.&nbsp; a nikkor 50 1.4g costs $400 and&nbsp; they want $800. no thank you. I dont care to buy the sigma 135. Im just waiting for others to drop their 135 DC so I can pick that up. DOF on 135 and f/2 is more than enough. no need for 1.8. since I shoot open rarely 1.8 is not necessary.&nbsp; im more curious in the 24-70 f/2 OS. because every 24/28-70 theyve put out was soft and lacked contrast and sharpness.by the one (pathetic) picture I saw that sigma did, its very capable and bettering the zeiss. wow, thatll be 3 lenses that sigma did thats a worthy lens. where the hell were they till now? they were selling crap till now. and thats years and thousands of lenses.anything more than $600 and im out. ill get the nikkor 1.8g and a 1.4Dthe current sigma 50 is better than the nikkors 1.8/1.4g. focus sucks A though.&nbsp; and they sell that for less than the nikkor 1.4g. so $600 is the right&nbsp; price for the new 50. it has more elements (its glass not gold) and its&nbsp; sharper. hearsay on the AF accuracy. but its a sigma. so another $200&nbsp; over the old 50 is very fair and logical. $400 over the old one is just a&nbsp; ripoff any way you look at it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rocketman122, post: 281457, member: 14443"] Exactly Rick. thats why I think the nikon offereings are more than fine. its just a 50mm. the 50 is now the new 35 or 85? no its just a must have focal lentgth. the sigma, performance wise looks very capable (although the test was done by sigma so I dont trust it 100%) but anything over $600 and I think its just not logical. a nikkor 50 1.4g costs $400 and they want $800. no thank you. I dont care to buy the sigma 135. Im just waiting for others to drop their 135 DC so I can pick that up. DOF on 135 and f/2 is more than enough. no need for 1.8. since I shoot open rarely 1.8 is not necessary. im more curious in the 24-70 f/2 OS. because every 24/28-70 theyve put out was soft and lacked contrast and sharpness. by the one (pathetic) picture I saw that sigma did, its very capable and bettering the zeiss. wow, thatll be 3 lenses that sigma did thats a worthy lens. where the hell were they till now? they were selling crap till now. and thats years and thousands of lenses. anything more than $600 and im out. ill get the nikkor 1.8g and a 1.4D the current sigma 50 is better than the nikkors 1.8/1.4g. focus sucks A though. and they sell that for less than the nikkor 1.4g. so $600 is the right price for the new 50. it has more elements (its glass not gold) and its sharper. hearsay on the AF accuracy. but its a sigma. so another $200 over the old 50 is very fair and logical. $400 over the old one is just a ripoff any way you look at it. [/QUOTE]

Verification