Sigma -- but which?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 68495
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 68495

Guest
I have decided to buy a wide-angle lens for my Nikon D810, it will be a Sigma as the Nikon ones are too expensive and too old now. I have a choice between two lenses at roughly the same price (at WEX in this instance, just for example) but which:

Sigma 14-24mm f2.8 DG HSM Art​


or

Sigma 14mm f1.8 DG HSM Art​


I am torn between the zoom of the, er, zoom, and the faster aperture of the 14mm prime.

I will do some astro work but there will also be some landscape...

...and even as I write this I am thinking that the zoom is the only way to go, hmm.

However, opinions matter, who's got one? :)
 
I think the zoom is going to be the better all rounder and usable for a greater range of subjects and shots - Don’t get me wrong, f.1.8 is going to be cool for certain types of photo but… how often you be shooting 14mm at f1.8? personally, and it’s really subjective but I think 20-24mm is a real sweet spot.
 
cuthbert said:
I think the zoom is going to be the better all rounder and usable for a greater range of subjects and shots - Don’t get me wrong, f.1.8 is going to be cool for certain types of photo but… how often you be shooting 14mm at f1.8? personally, and it’s really subjective but I think 20-24mm is a real sweet spot.
Click to expand...

Yes, I'm tending to agree with you. One major thing that puts me off is the highly exposed glass on the 14mm. That great big bulb of glass sticking out the front is a veritable target for all sorts, also it is not weather-sealed whereas the 14-24mm is. I think I have decided on the zoom but am looking into options, one of which is to trade in my Nikon 24-70mm to help buy it and using my 50mm f1.4 for general use as it turns out that many of the pictures I have taken with it range from 40-60mm anyway. The 50mm is so small and fast and is a cracking lens.
 
I have the zoom and it's got a similar front element to the prime although slightly more protected. Both are over a kilogram so they're heavyweight lenses. I picked the zoom for its flexibility and haven't regretted it!
 
If you don't do much astro then possibly consider the 12-24 MkII for a bit more flexibility with a slightly smaller max aperture at a lower price.
 
ancient_mariner said:
If you don't do much astro then possibly consider the 12-24 MkII for a bit more flexibility with a slightly smaller max aperture at a lower price.
Click to expand...
Speed is important to me and at 4.5-5.6 as a maximum aperture this one is a non-starter. I generally work on the premise that the sweet spot to any lens is two or three stops in from maximum. On a f1.8 lens we are looking at around f4, f5.6 but with a starting point at [best case] 4.5 we are looking at f8 to f11 for best resolution with the concomitant reduction in shutter speed or increase in ISO. Plus, I do want to do some astronomical work which is why I was originally also considering the 14mm prime lens.
 
magicolor1 said:
I have the zoom and it's got a similar front element to the prime although slightly more protected. Both are over a kilogram so they're heavyweight lenses. I picked the zoom for its flexibility and haven't regretted it!
Click to expand...

I'm used to carrying weight. I often lug about a Nikon D810 with 80-400mm zoom on it -- keeps me young and fit (I wish).
 
I decided on the 14-24mm Sigma, however things are not so simple anymore in the world of photography.

I looked through many of my photos for those that were taken with my 24-70mm Nikon zoom lens to see how many of them were taken at one extreme or the other. It would appear that most of the images were taken between 35mm and 60mm so really not far from the 'standard' 50mm lens. Now I have a 50mm lens, an f1.4, which is brilliant so I thought I would trade in my 24-70mm and see what I could get...

...not much is the answer.

I spoke to London Camera Exchange in Plymouth and they would offer me £280, even boxed, original packaging and being in perfect condition. I can see his reasons for this rather low price in that it is not even the latest lens -- the newer one has VR, mine doesn't (not that I've ever needed it) -- and it is not actually 'new', as in unused.

The biggest drawback however, is the fact that they almost exclusively stock mirrorless cameras, as that is the new thing, and I get the impression that any DSLR stuff would be special order and that they no longer keep much in stock. I find this rather sad (although unsurprising) as the chance of me ever moving to mirrorless is slim to none. A decent mirrorless body is three grand, with lenses on top, so it's not going to happen at my time of life. It also raises the question of whether to buy the Sigma 14-24mm at all bearing in mind the probability that it is already obsolete before it even leaves the factory! I have been looking on fleabay but the only used items are not much off the new price.

Sometimes I think about getting rid of the whole lot and buying a bridge camera with a stupidly large zoom on it instead.

Don't know what to do now, inertia has descended on my proposed exiting new purchase.
 
ShinySideUp said:
I decided on the 14-24mm Sigma, however things are not so simple anymore in the world of photography.

I looked through many of my photos for those that were taken with my 24-70mm Nikon zoom lens to see how many of them were taken at one extreme or the other. It would appear that most of the images were taken between 35mm and 60mm so really not far from the 'standard' 50mm lens. Now I have a 50mm lens, an f1.4, which is brilliant so I thought I would trade in my 24-70mm and see what I could get...

...not much is the answer.

I spoke to London Camera Exchange in Plymouth and they would offer me £280, even boxed, original packaging and being in perfect condition. I can see his reasons for this rather low price in that it is not even the latest lens -- the newer one has VR, mine doesn't (not that I've ever needed it) -- and it is not actually 'new', as in unused.

The biggest drawback however, is the fact that they almost exclusively stock mirrorless cameras, as that is the new thing, and I get the impression that any DSLR stuff would be special order and that they no longer keep much in stock. I find this rather sad (although unsurprising) as the chance of me ever moving to mirrorless is slim to none. A decent mirrorless body is three grand, with lenses on top, so it's not going to happen at my time of life. It also raises the question of whether to buy the Sigma 14-24mm at all bearing in mind the probability that it is already obsolete before it even leaves the factory! I have been looking on fleabay but the only used items are not much off the new price.

Sometimes I think about getting rid of the whole lot and buying a bridge camera with a stupidly large zoom on it instead.

Don't know what to do now, inertia has descended on my proposed exiting new purchase.
Click to expand...
try WEX and MPB for quotes

am in process of buying used lens from LCE -WEX guoted higher buy price for cash. LCE agreed to match - all done over the phone
 
Non-VR excellent condition £360 from MPB - still low as far as I am concerned but the lens wasn't being used.
 
Just a quick note on wide lenses.

I used to like my Sigma 12-24mm a lot and for a time it was my most used lens, I see the attraction, but, I think wide lenses can be some of the most difficult to use well, I think you need to really look and see and understand what's going on. Having said all that I do see the attraction and wide lenses can get some stunning results.

A related thought. Years ago I think the thought that you needed to stop lenses down to get good or even decent performance was true but with more modern lenses I don't think you can generalise any more and I think some are good enough from wide open so I think I'd keep the though that a lens might need to be stopped down in my mind but look primarily at the performance of the lens I was interested in before making my mind up.
 
ShinySideUp said:
I decided on the 14-24mm Sigma, however things are not so simple anymore in the world of photography.

I looked through many of my photos for those that were taken with my 24-70mm Nikon zoom lens to see how many of them were taken at one extreme or the other. It would appear that most of the images were taken between 35mm and 60mm so really not far from the 'standard' 50mm lens. Now I have a 50mm lens, an f1.4, which is brilliant so I thought I would trade in my 24-70mm and see what I could get...

...not much is the answer.

I spoke to London Camera Exchange in Plymouth and they would offer me £280, even boxed, original packaging and being in perfect condition. I can see his reasons for this rather low price in that it is not even the latest lens -- the newer one has VR, mine doesn't (not that I've ever needed it) -- and it is not actually 'new', as in unused.

The biggest drawback however, is the fact that they almost exclusively stock mirrorless cameras, as that is the new thing, and I get the impression that any DSLR stuff would be special order and that they no longer keep much in stock. I find this rather sad (although unsurprising) as the chance of me ever moving to mirrorless is slim to none. A decent mirrorless body is three grand, with lenses on top, so it's not going to happen at my time of life. It also raises the question of whether to buy the Sigma 14-24mm at all bearing in mind the probability that it is already obsolete before it even leaves the factory! I have been looking on fleabay but the only used items are not much off the new price.

Sometimes I think about getting rid of the whole lot and buying a bridge camera with a stupidly large zoom on it instead.

Don't know what to do now, inertia has descended on my proposed exiting new purchase.
Click to expand...

Yes - a depressing state of affairs.

But - the original NON VR 24-70 2.8 Nikkor is a very old design, superseded by the 24-70 F2.8 VR then the Z mount version. I believe you can still buy new ones though but value retention on such an old design lens is low. I sold a VR 24-70 2.8 to MPB - the price was depressing also given what I paid for it - but hey ho, it wasn't quite right for me.

F mount len's aren't obsolete, they can be adapted to Z mount and then work natively - yes the Z ones are a bit better, but it's not a night and day transformation. Sigma ones can be remounted to another mount (at significant expense though) so you do have that option as well as various adapters. I'd just buy it and use it. It's a better lens than the ancient F mount lens, but probably not as good as the latest Z mount lens - but then again it costs half as much and you don't need a Z7/Z6 or Z9 to use it.
 
Last edited:
piper said:
try WEX and MPB for quotes

am in process of buying used lens from LCE -WEX guoted higher buy price for cash. LCE agreed to match - all done over the phone
Click to expand...
I have got a quote from WEX which is higher than LCE, if only by £33. I have decided to accept their offer and it's being picked up tomorrow (it's worth noting that if one couldn't get to a LCE shop, they would charge ten quid for the collection).
welshwizard645 said:
, superseded by the 24-70 F2.8 VR then the Z mount version. I believe you can still buy new ones though but value retention on such an old design lens is low. I sold a VR 24-70 2.8 to MPB - the price was depressing also given what I paid for it - but hey ho, it wasn't quite right for me.
Click to expand...
I always seem to see a scene then have to zoom out or move back to get the picture I want of it so a wide angle zoom should be good for my photography.

SFTPhotography said:
F mount len's aren't obsolete, they can be adapted to Z mount and then work natively - yes the Z ones are a bit better, but it's not a night and day transformation. Sigma ones can be remounted to another mount (at significant expense though) so you do have that option as well as various adapters. I'd just buy it and use it. It's a better lens than the ancient F mount lens, but probably not as good as the latest Z mount lens - but then again it costs half as much and you don't need a Z7/Z6 or Z9 to use it.
Click to expand...

I agree.. Obsolete was probably too extreme a word but I was implying that the days of the DSLR are definitely numbered, I can't see manufacturers putting much more effort into developing non-mirrorless lenses, I think what there is, is all there will be in the very near future; if that future is not already here.
 
woof woof said:
Just a quick note on wide lenses.

I used to like my Sigma 12-24mm a lot and for a time it was my most used lens, I see the attraction, but, I think wide lenses can be some of the most difficult to use well, I think you need to really look and see and understand what's going on. Having said all that I do see the attraction and wide lenses can get some stunning results.

A related thought. Years ago I think the thought that you needed to stop lenses down to get good or even decent performance was true but with more modern lenses I don't think you can generalise any more and I think some are good enough from wide open so I think I'd keep the though that a lens might need to be stopped down in my mind but look primarily at the performance of the lens I was interested in before making my mind up.
Click to expand...

It is time I took my compositions more slowly, do more landscapes, take my time; at my age I don't move so quickly anymore anyway so my photography might as well slow down with me.

It won't be my only lens though. I still have my trusty 50mm f1.4, a 105mm Micro for bugs and things, an 80-400mm for those far-away things and if I need something between 24mm and 50mm I have my Fuji X100V that'll cover 35mm (FF equivalent), so I'm still pretty much covered.

Regarding the stopping down of things: yes you are probably right and perhaps I am a little stuck in my ways as I started in the seventies when f8 was the magic number.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ShinySideUp said:
Regarding the stopping down of things: yes you are probably right and perhaps I am a little stuck in my ways as I started in the seventies when f8 was the magic number.
Click to expand...

I quite get that - with the Nikon kit I had it often needed f8 or f11 for max detail, but since moving to much more recent designs I find that I can shoot wide open with very little loss of detail indeed. Aperture is now the depth of field control, rather than sharpness, vignette and fringing control it once was.
 
Mike.P said:
Not quite as wide but how about the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG EX ART. I bought one in Canon EF mount to use on my Sony full frame but it's just as good on my Canon crop bodies.

Very sharp lens even wide open.
Click to expand...
Too late, already decided on the 14-24mm, plus I'm selling a 24-70mm to part pay for it.
 
Mike.P said:
Not quite as wide but how about the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 DG EX ART. I bought one in Canon EF mount to use on my Sony full frame but it's just as good on my Canon crop bodies.

Very sharp lens even wide open.
Click to expand...

A lens that has always grabbed my fancy. What put me off was no weather sealing so being a zoom a bit of a dust sucker into the sensor. Wound up with a 28mm, 40mm and 20mm prime combo.
 
ancient_mariner said:
I quite get that - with the Nikon kit I had it often needed f8 or f11 for max detail, but since moving to much more recent designs I find that I can shoot wide open with very little loss of detail indeed. Aperture is now the depth of field control, rather than sharpness, vignette and fringing control it once was.
Click to expand...
Classic F mount issue. Especially on the shorter FLs, even stopped down supposedly sharp lens were mush on the sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top