I was totally against Sigma till I got the 50 1.4

<p>So like the subject line says I was totally against Sigma till I got the 50mm 1.4 . I will admit I was a lens snob. Then I got the 50mm 1.4 due to the stellar reviews, and the better reviews against the Nikon 50 1.4. So Now im looking at getting a 24-70 and I was thinking about the sigma. I hear its awesome. Is it that good? Money is not a issue. I know the Nikon 24-70 is epic but what about the Sigma?</p>

<p>the 24-70, nikon version, is so good, that the sigma version barely rates a mention.</p>

 

<p>Eric<br>

With a answer like that I have to ask have YOU tried them both?<br>

I can't answer either way because I have not used either of the lenses in question.</p>

<p>There are plenty of threads on this lens all over the internet. Most compare it in quality to the Canon 50L if that means anything to you. I love mine and it stays on the camera 80% of the time.<br>

@f2 iso 1000 natural light.<br>

<img src="http://lh4.ggpht.com/_YnKXlWOhGOE/TRi6Vq5x3BI/AAAAAAAA-LE/plgF4HC7Wwo/s800/IMG_8228.jpg" alt="" width="534" height="800" /></p>

<p>mike, i have several sigma lenses, including the 50/1.4. that said, the nikon 24-70 is the shiznit. i wouldn't bother with anything else in that range. none of the reviews of the sigma were encouraging. i also own the tamron 28-75, but that lens won't be seeing any stick time anytime soon.</p>

<p>I heard the Sigma 50 isn't that great on full frame cameras.</p>

<p>I wish I could say the same… they got the glass down, but everything else seems kinda iffy to me. I did, however, see a nice, cheap Sigma 30 on CL today complete with Sigma's professional quality paint.</p>

I had also steered well clear of sigma until reports and tests of the new 85mm 1.4 came out but it's still the only lens I would buy from them though.

<p>Eric<br>

Thats cool I am sorry to say I jumped to a conclusion ...... I own mostly Nikon glass but I also have Two Sigma lenses. A old (from the late 80's) 70-300 f3.5-5.6 that was very good at the time and is still no slouch but because of its speed it sees very little use today. I also use there 120-300 f/2.8, this is a great lens and the one that makes me most of my $$. ( I shoot equestrian events for a living)<br>

I also have a Tamron 14mm f/2.8 that when I bought it looked better then the Nikon 14 I tried it against in the store.<br>

I hear a lot of good about the Sigma 50 but I can see no reason to replace the Nikon 50 f/1.4 that I have.</p>

<p>The Sigma 50-150/2.8 DX was very nice too. But, Sigma has some sample-to-sample variability, so there's a significant chance you get a dog. But, more likely you get a good one.</p>

<p>Enjoy.</p>

<p>The new Sigma 24-70 f2.8 works well on DX but the edges are poor on FX, similar in that regard to the 50 f1.4. Their macro lenses are also good, especially the 70mm.</p>

<p>I share you experience, i had missconceptions about sigma until i bought a used 20 1.8. It is simply better that i had hoped for and has none of the problems sigma's are rumored to have. I've heard alot of bad things about the 50 1.4 as well.<br>

I think i might give sigma some more credit and purchase the 85 1.4 to replace my nikkor 85 1.8.</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

<p>all my sigmas are fairly recent, except for a used 15-30 i bought for under $200. i have the 15mm fisheye (which is great on FX), the 50-150 (which is awesome on DX), the 30/1.4, and the 50/1.4. i need to check the corner performance on FX but i didn't buy it for that, i bought it for the bokeh, which is as advertised, i also have the 17-50/2.8 OS HSM. the stabilization works, but i'm not so sure about the colors, which don't seem as good as the tamron 17-50 i used to have. the tungsten performance seems oversaturated, but that may just be the d90, which i didnt have when i had the tamron. i also dont like the way the zoom ring turns (Canon-style), though the build is way better than the tamron. the MTF ratings for that are off the charts, esp. at f/4-5.6, but so far my real-world experience is mixed. i wouldn't hesitate to get a sigma prime, macro, or w/a, though. and the 85/1.4 is certainly tempting.</p>

<p>I have the Sigma 50 1.4 as well as the Nikon 24-70...while the Nikon is worth the money I think the Sigma 24-70 would satisfy 80% of the photographers....but yes the 50mm 1.4 is the best 50mm I have ever owned period.</p>