chris_mitsuoka Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 Does anyone have any experience with these? I have a 35 - 70, would like more wide angle, but don't want to give up too much on sharpness and contrst. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hans_janssen Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 I had the Sigma 24-70 and it is a good lens, but it can't match the Nikkor 28-70 2.8 I have now. I believe the 35-70 and 28-70 are nearly the same quality. May a Nikkor 17-55 2.8 is a solution, not instead but extra. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 The 35-70/2.8 AF Nikkor is in a class by itself in terms of price:performance value. Any Nikkor of equal quality with more focal length range costs twice as much or more. I'm considering adding the Tokina 12-24/4 to fill out the range below the 35-70. I don't think the gap between 24mm and 35mm will be a serious problem that can't be solved with my feet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayward Posted July 18, 2007 Share Posted July 18, 2007 I think you are asking if the Nikon's sharpness and contrast are superior enough to the Sigma's lower cost and extra reach. Yes, it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gv Posted July 20, 2007 Share Posted July 20, 2007 My basic travel kit is the 35-70 Nikkor and the Tokina 12-24 zoom with a D80 and a flash. I can travel light and work quickly with just two zooms. And I have a whole bunch of Nikkor lenses from 20mm to 300mm going back to when I started photographing in '81... Less Is More for me these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now