Swap my Nikon 24-120 f4 for a Sigma 24-70 f2.8?

10 Gauge

Senior Member
This decision has been on my mind as of late.

Years ago, when I got out of photography after getting my gear stolen, the last general purpose lens I was using on my 7D was the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 and it was absolutely amazing.

I'm trying to decide if I should swap out my 24-120 for the Siggy. I don't really think I could wrong. I know I'll lose a few mm in zoom on the long end but I'm also looking in to the Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro lens as well which would give me a decent middle ground between the 70mm reach of the Siggy, then 100mm of the Tokina, and 150mm starting point of the Tamzooka. I really don't think I'd be missing any of the focal coverages in between those 3 lenses. I could make all of my shots work one way or another with that combo.

Is anyone here using the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 on an FX body Nikon? I'd like to make sure that you are as happy with it as I was using it on my 7D, because I was REALLY REALLY happy with it.

Thanks for all opinions and input.
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
This decision has been on my mind as of late. ... I'm trying to decide if I should swap out my 24-120 for the Siggy. I don't really think I could wrong.
The only point where the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM doesnt' crush the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 is focal length. The Siggy is faster, sharper and displays much(!!) less chromatic aberration than the Nikon. I know CA is relatively easily removed but just NOT having it is even better. If you don't mind giving up the extra mm on the long end, the Sig is the better lens. Hands down, full stop.
....
 

wornish

Senior Member
The Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 is full frame and it gets very good reviews. The thread on here shows what it can do. It beats the Nikon equivalent, weighs a lot less, AND has VC.
The Tamron also gets higher scores than the Nikon 24-120 f/4.

Be interesting to see how the Tokina compares in terms of price and image quality.

I am really very pleased with my Tamron.
 
Last edited:

10 Gauge

Senior Member
Hmmm, didn't look in to the Tamron 24-70. Off to DxO for some research! lol

Edit: WOW. The Tamron looks to be a freakin' killer lens. Now I really want to check it out. $849 for a gray market copy seems like a steal too.....
 
Last edited:

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
I'm real interested in both the Tamron 24-70/2.8 and the 70-200/2.8. The comparisons between these and the Nikon glass stand for themselves, regardless of price. My only hesitation is that since these are staple lenses that I would hold on to for a very long time ... is whether Nikon does anything to kill 3rd party compatibility in future firmware or camera bodies.
 

wornish

Senior Member
I'm real interested in both the Tamron 24-70/2.8 and the 70-200/2.8. The comparisons between these and the Nikon glass stand for themselves, regardless of price. My only hesitation is that since these are staple lenses that I would hold on to for a very long time ... is whether Nikon does anything to kill 3rd party compatibility in future firmware or camera bodies.

I was nervous when I bought my first non Nikon lens for the same reasons , but I am glad I did.

This issue has been raised quite a few times on here and elsewhere.
If the lens works with your current cameras at their current firmware levels then you are OK.

If Nikon change the camera firmware so it won't support a 3rd party lens that does work on todays firmware, then don't upgrade the firmware.
I am sure thousands of people would shout if they did try do that and remember they are also risking all their installed base of legacy lenses which can't be updated so it would be a crazy step.

As for new camera bodies no one knows. If they bring out a new mount then again it hits all their installed base like when they introduced DX and CX lenses.

All the major compatible lens manufacturers have been around for years and I am not aware of anything like what you fear happening.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I have the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 and think it does a great job...except the bokeh wide open or even at f/4 or f/5.6 leaves a lot to be desired. However, that can be edited in post. Definitely check out the Tamron as it's highly rated--even better than the Sigma. If you want to see some photos taken with my Sigma, you can check out my Flickr account.
 
My only hesitation... is whether Nikon does anything to kill 3rd party compatibility in future firmware or camera bodies.

It happens. Depending on the age of the lens, the OEM may be willing to address their firmware (if you don't mind having your lens disassembled). Do the new Tamron's have user upgradeable firmware like the Siggies? If so, I doubt that it would be an issue for an awfully long time.

I have owned several Siggies, but try to stick with Nikkor lenses. And I no longer buy lenses on specs anymore; I have learned that they don't tell the whole story about how a lens looks.

I just wish they weren't so bloody expensive.
 

salukfan111

Senior Member
The only point where the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM doesnt' crush the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 is focal length. The Siggy is faster, sharper and displays much(!!) less chromatic aberration than the Nikon. I know CA is relatively easily removed but just NOT having it is even better. If you don't mind giving up the extra mm on the long end, the Sig is the better lens. Hands down, full stop.
....
Does it crush a Nikkor 24-85 VR G that can be found on ebay used for 300ish?
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Anyone have any experience with the Sigma on a DX body - D7100 is what I shoot

Bought it to use with my D7000. Excellent lens. When I got my D600 it came with the 24-85mm which gave me more reach and less weight. It's seen very little use since, but only because if I want a lot of bokeh/DoF I'll go with primes, otherwise I prefer the reach of the 24-120mm. If it had flaws it would be on the edges, which you eliminate with the cropped sensor. I was planning on using it for Infrared but it's not optimal for that as it's very prone to hot spotting (an IR phenomena only), so I'm looking to sell it. Probably not worth the shipping rate to your part of the world but ping me if you're interested.
 

Lawrence

Senior Member
Bought it to use with my D7000. Excellent lens. When I got my D600 it came with the 24-85mm which gave me more reach and less weight. It's seen very little use since, but only because if I want a lot of bokeh/DoF I'll go with primes, otherwise I prefer the reach of the 24-120mm. If it had flaws it would be on the edges, which you eliminate with the cropped sensor. I was planning on using it for Infrared but it's not optimal for that as it's very prone to hot spotting (an IR phenomena only), so I'm looking to sell it. Probably not worth the shipping rate to your part of the world but ping me if you're interested.
Ping on way
 
Top