zofia Posted December 3, 2006 Share Posted December 3, 2006 It's been a looooong time since I purchased a new lens. I'm still using my older lenses, on my D70s and I'm getting a D80. I can tell more now, then with film, that my current lenses are not up to par for me. I'm shooting more and more portraits then weddings these days, so I need something pretty sharp. I'm throwing my Tamron 28-200 out the window of a moving car, I like my Sigma 28-80 3.5 5.6 Macro, it's pretty clean, but it's too slow. I don't own any DX lenses. I'm buying the 50 1.4 Nikon. I can't afford the 80-200 Nikon that I've been drooling about for 8 years.., plus it's too heavy for me. My question is specifically about the Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 EX DC HSM. If I had a ton of money, I'd only buy Nikon. This Sigma lens looks good, it's fast, and the right zoom that I like. So should I be wary that it's a Sigma? Do any of you have this lens and like it (or not)? Is it sharp? Does it stand up to a Nikon lens? (Duh, probably not.) Would it be an ok addition? Or could anyone recommend what I should be shooting through instead? Thanks for your time. Z Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 IMHO, Sigma=paperweight,doorstop or a very lightweight boat anchor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
low light Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I have two Sigma lenses and I think they are just as good as the Nikon versions. Why don't you hire the lens from somewhere and see for yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_fialon Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Hi Zofia, I know this isn't an answer to your question but you had mentioned picking-up a Nikon 50 1.4; have you looked at the Nikon 50 1.8? I have this lens and have been very happy with it! The construction isn't as solid but it's about half the price of the 1.4. Just thought you'd like to know! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmichaelc Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 "IMHO, Sigma=paperweight,doorstop or a very lightweight boat anchor" When is the last time you used a Sigma Steve? Seems like a statement of ignorance to me. I have standard Canons, L's, and Sigmas. The Sigmas are excellent for the money. I've heard great things about the 50-150 2.8 Zofia. I do have the 70-200 F2.8 and it's fast, silent, and sharp...well worth the price tag. The ONLY issue that you may run into with Sigmas is a slight front and/or back focus problem with shooting wide open. I had this problem with the 70-200 but...i sent it back in to Sigma and they repaired and calibrated it for free. Should you worry? Well, i have the Sigma 15-30 and it holds up against canon's wides optically. I also have the Sigma 20mm 1.8 and it is a fantastic lens. Can't compare...canon makes nothing to compete with the speed of the 1.8. The 70-200 also competes with the canon 200MML prime. So, in short, and in all honesty, i'd say that you nothing to fear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zofia Posted December 4, 2006 Author Share Posted December 4, 2006 Jammey, you should be a sales rep, cause I'm sold! That's the answer I was hoping for. I really want some new toys and I have a limited budget. (My baby daughter's toys come first this time of year!) Paul, I think you're right. I'm going for the 1.8. Thanks so much you guys! Happy Holidays, Z. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_levine Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I've owned a few Sigmas. In a short time, they either fell apart, or clouded up inside, your move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_jacoby___raleigh__nc Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 I bought the Sigma 50-150 as soon as it came out and am very pleased with it but keep in mind I am doing wedding work with it. It is great for shooting down the aisle and across a reception hall. It is fast enough, sharp enough and whisper quiet. But it is not lightweight at over 2 pounds especialy if you are shooting with a flash mounted on a bracket. But I do not hesitate to recommend it for all it's good qualities. Since you are doing more portrait work, have you considered picking up a Nikon 85mm 1.8? It is a great focal length for flattering portraits - head & shoulders or 3/4 length. I love mine! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russ_butner___portland__or Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 Check out the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. It's sharper than the Nikon and Canon equvalents. Russ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_leck Posted December 4, 2006 Share Posted December 4, 2006 <i>Check out the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. It's sharper than the Nikon and Canon equvalents.</i> <p>Hello.... Would you please provide some support for this? I have a hard time believing that anything (outside of some Nikon primes) would be sharper than the Nikon AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8. [Okay, I'm not speaking for Canon or other lenses that may or may not fit Nikon.] <p>Since we're in the same neighborhood, maybe we could have a friendly shoot-out. Please note that Zofia already is frustrated with Tamron and is looking for something in a completely different zoom range from what you are suggesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zofia Posted December 5, 2006 Author Share Posted December 5, 2006 That's true. Ideally I'm looking for a couple lenses ranging from 18-200. And no, I don't want the 18-200 Nikon, I haven't heard good things. And I'm on a limited budget... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michelle a. Posted December 5, 2006 Share Posted December 5, 2006 I really don't understand why people like to rag on Sigma.... as one who uses Nikon cameras but does not belong to the "If It's Not A Nikon Lens It's Cr*p Cult".... I'll say I have 3 Sigma lenses and couldn't be happier with them. A 20-40 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and a 105 f2.8 macro..... I saved a bundle of money buying these over Nikons. And they work beautifully. Yeah maybe someday when I'm rich and famous... I'll invest a big wad in lenses that are twice the price or more.... but until then..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris m., central florida Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Chris, I can vouch for the sharpness of the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8. If you have a good sample, it easily produces image quality on par with Nikon or Canon equivelents in simlar lenses. It's not going to match a prime. But it will certainly match the Nikon 28-70mm f2.8 AF-S (although it doesn't focus as fast), and it matched the venerable 35-70mm f2.8 D. (about the same AF speed). It is not as well built, but will easily last for many years of professional use if taken care of properly. For $350ish, it's a steal. My comments are based on real world use on a day in, day out basis - I'm not a weekend shooter. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_leck Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 Chris, I also am a pro and shoot a lot of action. The slower AF speed of the Tamron would kill it for me, but not necessarily for others. The noise of screw drive lenses means that I can't use it in many places I shoot (theaters, churches). I wore out some of the internal zoom gearing of my Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 in about three years. [it was repaired quickly under the 5-year warranty.] I take good care of my gear, but I use it. I would not want anything less robust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfr Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 Sigma is quite good in the tele range. If you read the reviews carefully, you'll know all the down- and upsides. I don't think you can go horribly wrong, although I'd look into low light focussing abilities, if that's fine then why not. The true marble in the sigma line up IMO is the 30 1.4 very hard to beat. Especially at that price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gregory_c Posted December 15, 2006 Share Posted December 15, 2006 OK, this is painful, if you shoot for money, you need to consider the factory brand lens, the best you can afford, if necessary, use your credit card,,,recently paid off my 20D & L series lens,,, 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