Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 EX DG - how bad is it?!

Not sure about the Sigma as I’ve not used one. The Tamron 28-75 2.8 enjoys a decent reputation for the money though if budget is the issue :)
 
Can't comment on the Sigma lens as I've never used one. I can on the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2. I find it an excellent lens, and can be bought grey at a very reasonable price.
 
I would stay well away from antiquated sigma zooms. From experience 13 years ago it was very poor.

You should be looking at new os art version at the very least.

It is really the wrong way round to buy latest and greatest and expensive cameras and end up with crappy cheap lenses
 
Optically it’s fine, on a par with the Canon of the same age, likely the Nikon too.

But the old focus motors are slow, noisy and unreliable.

As a budget option, I wouldn’t ignore it, but be aware of the limitations,
 
Sounds like current models are much improved compared to the one I bought about 8 years ago.

Perhaps I was unlucky and got a bad one but it was slightly worse than an empty toilet roll.

I think Sigma were going through QC issues at the time.
 
I would personally rather go for the Tamron 28-75 2.8, the older Nikon version with the aperture ring.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
I would stay well away from antiquated sigma zooms. From experience 13 years ago it was very poor.

You should be looking at new os art version at the very least.

It is really the wrong way round to buy latest and greatest and expensive cameras and end up with crappy cheap lenses
Click to expand...
I agree - however, the 810 was a birthday present - no way I could afford one! Hence my looking for more affordable lenses!
 
Thank you all for your input.

I have been thinking and as I'd like to use the 810 more for traveling - and the enjoyment I had using prime lenses - I am going to avoid the sigma zoom and go for a Nikon 35mm AF f2D instead. I already have an 80-200 2.8 and 300 f4 so covered on the long end - and for what I do most with the 810, portraits, I think i'll be ok!
 
toohuge said:
Thank you all for your input.

I have been thinking and as I'd like to use the 810 more for traveling - and the enjoyment I had using prime lenses - I am going to avoid the sigma zoom and go for a Nikon 35mm AF f2D instead. I already have an 80-200 2.8 and 300 f4 so covered on the long end - and for what I do most with the 810, portraits, I think i'll be ok!
Click to expand...

50mm AFS primes and 35mm sound reasonable.

What about older 28-70mm nikon? Is that too expensive?

I heard tamron is not too bad but it is more plastic and slower to focus at the very least. I'd have the Nikon over that for sure.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
50mm AFS primes and 35mm sound reasonable.

What about older 28-70mm nikon? Is that too expensive?

I heard tamron is not too bad but it is more plastic and slower to focus at the very least. I'd have the Nikon over that for sure.
Click to expand...
I've looked at the 28-70 Nikon - really like that lens, however, I am not keen on the potential AF-S motor failures and lack of parts! The AF-D drive type lenses I am more comfortable with!
 
LongLensPhotography said:
50mm AFS primes and 35mm sound reasonable.

What about older 28-70mm nikon? Is that too expensive?

I heard tamron is not too bad but it is more plastic and slower to focus at the very least. I'd have the Nikon over that for sure.
Click to expand...

My 28-70 wouldn’t work on my D810. The af motor just made a clicking noise, but worked fine when back on my D700. Traded it in for a used Nikon 24-70 which worked fine but is a big heavy lens.

I also bought a 24-85 which was much more lightweight and compact and worked well as a travel lens as However it got slightly scratched and when I tried to PX it they also said it had fungus in it so I’ve more or less written it off. Consequently I’ve just acquired a used 24-120 F4 which is somewhere in between in terms of weight and size but nearer the 24-70 in terms of image quality from what I can see.
 
never buy 3rd party lens
stick with the nikon
the older 28-70mm is built like a tank and has good iq
 
I had the EX DG Pentax fit and I bought it for the MZ-S, thinking the MZ-D wasn't too far behind... When I got the *istD the focal length didn't quite fit and as soon as I got the DA* Pentax lenses all the film era lenses were sold.

I think I had the earlier version of the lens (non-macro and non-HSM) it was good but I preferred the FA24-90 (another lens sold, wish I kept that one).,

Sigma did go through a dodgy QC patch, would I buy an older 24-70 EX DG now for my D810 - I'd go for the 24-120 f4 Nikkor (NOT the 3.5-5.6!!) - the older lenses might not focus and Sigma want £50 to upgrade the lenses (if they can be upgraded).
 
Thank you all - I used to own a 35-70 2.8, sold it.... then about 2 months later, the D810 arrived :D Anyway, I was disappointed with that lens as mine was too soft wide open. If I could find an affordable one of those, I would get one again - mine was really cheap the first time around and I can't bring myself to buy another for more money!

I agree about staying with Nikon - I don't like straying outside of the pack!

My lenses so far:
17-55 f2.8
35 1.8 DX
50 1.8D
80-200 f2.8
300 f4

I have looked at the 24-85 - however I prefer a constant aperture lens and fast ones preferably! The 24-10 f4 has never appealed, I'm not sure why - I think it's because I prefer primes on the wide end.
 
toohuge said:
I agree about staying with Nikon - I don't like straying outside of the pack!
Click to expand...

It's your choice but I think you and holty are just... daft. One look at the Sigma Art range should tell you that 3rd party marques are worth looking at. Surely it makes sense to look at any marque and buy what's best for you at your price point. I just can't imagine limiting myself to Nikon only. You're not married to Nikon or any other marque... it's just daft to make blanket statements like you and holty. IMO.
 
Last edited:
toohuge said:
I've looked at the 28-70 Nikon - really like that lens, however, I am not keen on the potential AF-S motor failures and lack of parts! The AF-D drive type lenses I am more comfortable with!
Click to expand...

This is a genuine issue with the 28-70. They are built exceptionally well but they're all getting on a bit now and are the type of lens that is likely to have had a lot of use. I've had two over the years and both have needed to be repaired for AF issues and clearances. Only lenses I've actually had to have maintenance carried out on. Unless I could find one that had had a recent major overhaul, I'd be quite wary. Besides which, the original Nikon 24-70 values have dropped a lot recently so there isn't much to be saved anymore by going for the 28-70. For me it would be either of the Tamron 24-70 VC's or the Nikon 24-70 non VC. The new sigma OS looks nice enough but doesn't seem to be a class leader like some of their other lenses.
 
toohuge said:
Thank you guys - I know I am crazy for sticking to the manufacture - I do this with Canon too.... Anyway - I think holding out for a Tamron G2 will be the best bet. In the meantime, I'm keeping my eyes open for a 35mm prime.
Click to expand...

Then you may or may not want to consider the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art lens, one of the best lenses I own. I’ve had some mediocre Sigma’s in the past but this is several orders of magnitude better than them. It’s also significantly cheaper than the Nikon equivalent (but lacks weather sealing if that’s important to you).
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Then you may or may not want to consider the Sigma 35mm F1.4 Art lens, one of the best lenses I own. I’ve had some mediocre Sigma’s in the past but this is several orders of magnitude better than them. It’s also significantly cheaper than the Nikon equivalent (but lacks weather sealing if that’s important to you).
Click to expand...

Thanks! I’ll probably get the Nikon 35 f2 as it’s nice and small!

The 1.4 primes are amazing - both sigma and Nikon - however cool as these are - I don’t need a 1.4 prime - I can’t imagine using a 35 @ 1.4!
 
toohuge said:
Thanks! I’ll probably get the Nikon 35 f2 as it’s nice and small!

The 1.4 primes are amazing - both sigma and Nikon - however cool as these are - I don’t need a 1.4 prime - I can’t imagine using a 35 @ 1.4!
Click to expand...

I used the F2 lens on my D700, wasn’t that impressed with it. Not one I’d personally consider for a D810 but I’d consider the FX 1.8G if I wanted something lighter than the Sigma in the 35mm focal length.
 
toohuge said:
Thank you ^

Having looked at the prices - the sigma art 35 looks better value than the Nikon.

I’m curious to try the 35 f2 - I did try a 24 2.8 but sent it back - I think I had a damaged lens - the results were terrible.
Click to expand...

Hey, give it a go you might find it ok. I doubt it’s on the list of recommended lenses for the D800/810 from Nikon though due to its age. I thought the image quality was mediocre for a prime but I may just have had a bad copy. The Sigma is much better but also much bigger and much heavier though.
 
viewfromthenorth said:
Hey, give it a go you might find it ok. I doubt it’s on the list of recommended lenses for the D800/810 from Nikon though due to its age. I thought the image quality was mediocre for a prime but I may just have had a bad copy. The Sigma is much better but also much bigger and much heavier though.
Click to expand...

Thank you! I’ve been looking at my options and keep coming back to the sigma - it looks to be excellent. It is pretty spicy - especially compared to the Nikon 35 1.8 - however I don’t like the construction of that lens. - that’s really important to me and it’s a lot of money to spend on something.

That said, the 35 is close in price to the 24-35 f2 - which looks to be good value - however I’m concerned how much I’d really use the zoom capabilities !
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top