Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG

Messages
189
Name
.
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi guys wondered if anybody on here has had one..I've got a Nikon D90 with a Tamron 18-50mm f/2.8 .
The tamron is a great lens speed wise but i'm just lacking that extra focal..
Is it worth the upgrade? The price is telling me it's a better lens as its £200 more.
 
Copying what I said here: http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=326543&highlight=sigma+24-70mm

Hope it helps

"It really depends what you are asking from the lens to do...Obviously you will never get the IQ of a £1000 lens with a third of the money.

I got it for my A500 for 200 on this forum. The main reason I got it is that I am an amateur musician (and photographer ) and I tend to go to gigs of friends in small poor-lit venues where any other lens simply can't be used. I need to push my ISO up to 3200 and shoot with the lens wide open. Flash is no option as it is a bit annoying for people around. I do get decent results which are better than nothing. Alternative? for me two primes (one 30-35mm and a 50). Those will give you even better low-light capabilities but are less flexible.

Note that I was also thinking about getting a Tamron 17-50 but in the end I decided that the 24-70 would save me from wide angle distortion and gives me the chance to get better portraits at the 70mm end.

A lot of people complain about Sigma's quality control but my copy seems fine. Sharpness wide open is good (not great but I wouldnt expect to beat a £1500 zeiss with a lens i bought for £200) and the colours are nice and warm most of the times"
 
I've had mine 4 or 5 years from new. Never had a complaint with it.
I definitely won't be parting with or upgrading anytime soon.
 
Thanx for all your messages.. It seems there is a mixed result really..which i guess you get from forums. Ive had very good lenses as well which got bad reports.

I think I might have another look at reviews on each of these lens compared to the tamrom 17-50mm f/2.8
 
Back
Top