Sigma lenses: some love them, others hate them.
Sigma lenses: garbage or good alternative
(67 posts) (40 voices)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
I don't own any Sigma lenses. I do however use the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I've been eying the 70-200mm F2.8 for sometime. Still can't get over the fact that it's HALF what the Nikon equivalent would be. Granted the Nikon version would be a bit better, but we're talking more than $700 difference here. I'd buy the Sigma version in a heart beat, if I had the money(I'm absolutely broke right now. Damn economy). If it was one of the cheaper lens of sigma I would scuff at it, but the higher end ones are in the same class of the Nikkor equivalents.
Posted 4 years ago # -
10-20mm is the best
Posted 4 years ago # -
Good alternative. I've played with the 150mm Macro, and it feels much more durable, than the Nikon 105mm VR. The iq is lower, though.
Posted 4 years ago # -
My 18-50mm went crunchy then then the zoom ring broke. Bought it second-hand but only used it four months before it crapped out. I've contacted Sigma repair here in Japan and they are keen to take a look at it so maybe I can get it repaired, but I've since gotten 18-200mm and 50mm 1.4 Nikkors and prefer that combination. My experience discouraged me from even considering the Sigma 50mm (or the Sigma 70-200 for that matter, I sprang for the Nikkor again a couple of weeks ago). I don't want to pay good money for kit that won't tolerate someone actually using it.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Sigma here is treated as a "soft" lens. If we would like to trade in, likely Sigma would not be accepted.
Tokinas and Tamron will be accepted via trade ins.
I do still have Sigmas from 15yrs ago and works well on my D300. Especially the 300mm. It hunts a bit and slow, but hey, it worked... :D
Posted 4 years ago # -
I do like my sigma 24-70mm 2.8 on my D300. I'm not considering replacing it any time soon till I get a full frame camera (probably in 3 years! Ha ha!). It has disappointed me a few times in the wide angle range, but over all i have been pleased and have taken thousands of great photo's with it. My older sigma 28-300mm was a great lens for my D50 when that was my only camera, but it's just too dang soft for my D300.
Sigma's are a cheaper alternative, but most sigma zoom's are not quite as awesome as a Nikkor. Go with Nikon Nikkor when you can afford it.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I am very happy with both 30mm f/1.4 and 24-70mm f/2.8 on my D700, perhaps I was lucky to stumble upon particularly good copies!
Posted 4 years ago # -
I have a Sigma f/2.8 50-150mm HSM II and I love it. It's sharp wide open - which is where I use it -, with corners degrading slightly at 150mm. It's solid as rock, lightweight, zoom and focus rings move nicely. AF performance is great: It's fast, exact and almost silent, and, being a ring-type hypersonic AF, you can always correct manually.
So I will certainly buy the 10-20 f/3.5 as soon as it's available.
I'm also thinking about the f/2.8 18-50 HSM - anybody here has experience with that one?? Cheers, Martin
Posted 4 years ago # -
"Good alternative. I've played with the 150mm Macro, and it feels much more durable, than the Nikon 105mm VR. The iq is lower, though. "
Interesting I owned both and sold the Nikon as the Sigma had better IQ in my opinion.. Wide open the Sigma was sharper to me, though both are sharp. The Sigma especially for non macro use, has much stronger colour and contrast (my Nikon often took on a flat Canon kind of look).. I also found the Sigma to have less colour fringing..
Posted 4 years ago # -
Price/performance ratio is as good for sigma as it is for Nikon. Snobbery aside it fills a market niche that Nikon is largely ignoring i.e. the low budget side of the market.
I'm quite happy with my 70-300 APO. It comes somewhere between nikon's old g-type and the current VR on image quality and price.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Tried sig 10-20 vs Nikon 12-24. Ended up with the Nikon because I felt it had better IQ. (will get fisheye 10.5 soon for those situations when 12 mmm is not wide enough.
Tried sig 50 f 1.4 vs Nifon 50 f 1.4G. Tough decision. both excellent IQ, better bohey for the Sigma, Nikon lighter and cheaper. Ended up buying the Nikon.
Bought the Sigma 30 f 1.4. Excellent IQ, color, bokhey, very sharp. A friend of mine has the same lens in Canon mount. He has a lemon...
Sigma has excellent lenses in its lineup. It all comes down to QC, so buy your Sigma lenses in stores witth good return policies.
Posted 4 years ago # -
IMO all depends on how lucky are You with the lens You buy. During the last year I bought two Sigma lenses, 10-20 and 70-200/2.8. With the first one I had a lot of luck - the IQ is almost as good as on the Nikkor 14-24/2.8 (tested myself) and You get this couple additional mm on DX (not to mention the fact, that there's not a competition in this focal range from Nikon on DX), the second one ended up on auction just 3 months after I bought it - my previous nikon 70-300 vr was sharper, with more predictable behaviour, not to mention nikon 70-200/2.8.
So as Cariboubou wrote, try sigma if the place You get it from has a good return policy (unfortunately this doesn't aplly to shops in my country).Posted 4 years ago # -
I tried so many Sigmas over the years as a pro photog. And I will never buy one again. Holy crap, are these lenses bad. The only one I own is the 120-300/2.8 for Canon EF. I will sell it next time. Tokina and Tamron are OK, Nikon is best, but when you buy Sigma, you play lottery. Can be good, average or really bad. But never real good, I guess.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I have sigma 105mm macro and it's perfectly sharp even wide open. As far as I know, all sigma macro lenses are very good alternatives to Nikkors.
Posted 4 years ago # -
If you like lens flare then go Sigma. These "slightly better than doorstops" produce awful purple lens flare that ruin your photos. You buy a Nikon so you can use Nikon lenses - why would you use anything else.
Posted 4 years ago # -
anyone recent, try these lens out? I was sort of looking at the new 150mm macro.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I now mostly shoot FX ( D700) with Nikkor Lenes
But when I used a D90 I was very please with the Sigma 10-20
I bought a Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 and was pleased with it at the time
I was not impressed with a Sigma 150-500 I borrowed
If you can afford it and want proffessional quality, Nikkors are the only option
But if photography is your hobby, you can learn a lot and have great fun wth cheaper lenesPosted 1 year ago # -
tried the 80-400, it does not like being pointed in the general direction of the sun
much flare and ghosting. I do not know if this represents all of their offerings, it is the only Sigma I tried.enough to turn me off, no problems with the 70-300mm vr taking the same photographs.
well to be truthfull, I do not mind ghosts.................booo
Posted 1 year ago # -
What's the word on the new 120-300 f2.8 for Nikons? I handled one at a Canon shop in Chicago last week and I must say, I'm kind of impressed at it's responsiveness.
I'm used to an old 300mm f2.8 ED manual and have been eying the Sigma for it's versatility and AF. I'm just curious if anybody out there has any real world stories, good or bad.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I've heard the 70-200 2.8, 85mm 1.4 and the 50mm 1.4 isn't so bad.
But I haven't tried any of them.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I have and enjoy the Sigma 50mm F1.4 EX DG HSM. Fast focus - makes my Nikkor 35mm F1.8 look sluggish, and the bokeh is amazing. For portraits and inanimate objects it's usuably sharp at f/1.4 and gets even better if I stop it down to f/1.8 to f/2.2. It's bigger than the Nikkor 50's but that's not what's in question here. I often throw it on as a single focus walk around lens.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I'm not a huge Sigma fan, but this Sigma 50mm f/1.4 DG HSM EX lens I possess is actually pretty impressive. One of my fave 50mm prime lenses. That's about all I can say at this point. This is a great copy.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I realy love my Sigma 8-16mm , btw, there is no alternative lens for that one available ..
Posted 1 year ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
