Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

  1. #1
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    This shouldn't be a surprise, but to read all the in-depth reviews of the Sigma 24-105 Art and the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 you could be forgiven for thinking that either of them could give the Nikkor Trinity 24-70 F2.8 a run for its money.

    Loath to repurchase a Nikkor that I sold only a few months ago, I tried one copy of the Sigma and two of the Tamron on my new D810. The Sigma wasn't terrible but it was skewed and had pretty poor corners. Both of the Tamrons were very skewed, one almost unbelievably so. SO I bit the bullet, took it like a man and upped the ante for a Nikkor.

    It is GREAT. Better than the one I had before, in that by F8 the edges are acceptable if not brilliant at 24mm and at 70 it is really quite acceptable. But at 28, 35 and 50, especially at 50, it is really really nice. Worth the money, easily.

    I wonder if, when all the review sites get sent copies by Tamron and Sigma and so on, they get cherry picked good copies. It seems likely to me because they do review really well. But factory production copies are in my recent experience really are pot luck and in the end not worth the saving.

    The Nkkor is a fine companion for the D810 and if anyone is looking for a mid-range zoom, given my previous experiences with the 24-120 too, it is the best game in town.

    And thanks to the ever brilliant Park Cameras dealer for never questioning my judgement on this and for handing over replacements with good grace and humour...
    Likes 3 Member(s) liked this post

  2. #2
    Sr. Administrator Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Los Altos, CA
    Posts
    10,486
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1031

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    My best 17 and 20 lenses right now are an older Nikkor 17-35/2.8 zoom -- and it's not as good as the 24-70/2.8. Regardless, do yourself a favor and start looking for a good copy
    Jack
    home: www.getdpi.com

    "Perfection is not attainable. But if we chase perfection, we can catch excellence."
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Member dogstarnyc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    nyc-london-nyc
    Posts
    204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    Tash,

    If there ever was a holy trinity of gear sluts who know exactly the value of getting cherry picked, 'blue printed', 'spot on' great copy lenses... they are here...
    Jack
    Guy
    and Ken...

    In fact it was Ken (unbeknownst to him) that helped me quit my GAS (gear acquisition syndrome) for good. These boys know what they want, know how to spend and also know how to sell and regret it again later... though you are getting close .

    Having been 'clean' for over a year I upgraded to the D810 and woah... it sets off ALL the alarms again... 'maybe I should get this lens...Guy/Jack/Ken said...'

    As Jack said, do yourself a favour... once you buy a GREAT copy of a lens... You won't sell it on quite so quickly. Also in Blighty, if you buy via a site you can legally send it back within 14 days no quibble, so buy 5....

    FWIW I have only 1 Sigma lens, the 150mm macro and that's only because when in the UK I'm not far at all from their HQ in Herts.

    S
    Steve Brickles
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Member ThomasZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    73
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack View Post
    My best 17 and 20 lenses right now are an older Nikkor 17-35/2.8 zoom -- and it's not as good as the 24-70/2.8. Regardless, do yourself a favor and start looking for a good copy
    And I thought I am the only one who likes this lens. I own it since the D700 days and never thought about selling it. In fact, I'm using it on the A7r, since it is AF-D lens with an aperture ring.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portland, Maine
    Posts
    94
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    "I wonder if, when all the review sites get sent copies by Tamron and Sigma and so on, they get cherry picked good copies. It seems likely to me because they do review really well. But factory production copies are in my recent experience really are pot luck and in the end not worth the saving."

    I can't believe anyone would suggest such a thing.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    I suggest it because I was looking at Roger Cicala and DXO remarks on the Tamron and they are so positive, and yet so utterly and completely not a description of either of the two copies I tried this week, which seem to have been assembled with, errr, let me say less care...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    760
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    It is probably more appropriate to compare the Sigma 24-105 to the Nikon 24-120. I have both the Nikon 24-70 and 24-120. The former is optically better especially in the corners. The lack of image stabilization makes the Nikon 24-70 less optimal for general walking around and non-tripod shooting… plus that lens is relatively heavy. Also how well does the Sigma image stabilization work? Never had a Sigma with image stabilization.

  8. #8
    Subscriber Member tashley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South of England
    Posts
    3,295
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Mid range Zooms for D*xx - you get what you pay for

    The stabilisation seemed quite good, but it is of that spooky kind that doesn't work on the half press, so doesn't help you keep a steady view to compose or to manually focus. I prefer the other type, other things being equal. But the real problem with the Siggy is the lack of subtle transition to blurry corners: the zone from sharp to really fuzzy is very abrupt and that makes it more noticeable.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •