this lens with D7000?

[louise1]

<p>I've done some searching but I can't find seem to find a consistent answer (some say it will, some say it won't). Will this lens Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF work with a D7000? I know it's discontinued, and the HSM version is much pricier. But I've found one for under $300 used. I'll upgrade to full frame whenever the next iteration of the D700 is out, so I want the full frame. But will this lens work on my new D7000? I have a friend who has this lens on her D200 and loves it. I love the images it renders. ( I did search photo.net but can't find a thread which references this question)</p>

<p>thank you</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Yes - it can be used with the D7000 - since the D7000 has an af motor in body it will work fine with it.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[pauldmurphy]

<p>Louise,</p>

<p>I believe it will work with your D7000. I have a Sigma 28-70mm f/2.8 EX DG which works on both my D90 and D7000. </p>

<p>If you look at the mount of 24-70mm you're considering and it has the little round driver with the slot in it, that is the coupler to the camera AF motor which both the D90 and D7000 have.</p>

<p>Hope this helps.</p>

<p>Paul</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>Even if it's screwdrive AF it'll work... but 24 isn't wide enough for most general shooting on DX. It would frustrate me like crazy...</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>for $300 its probably worth it, if in good condition. it's hard to find a comparable lens for cheaper, and you could certainly do worse for that same amount of money. used sigma EX-series lenses are great as long as you have lowered expectations to match the lowered price. i got a used 15-30 FF UWA for $160 and its been a great performer so far.</p>

<p>are you buying sight unseen, or will you have a chance to test? if its the latter, be sure to do an AF check to make sure there are no focus accuracy issues. put the lens on the camera, set the aperture to 2.8, take the camera box and focus just in front, in the center of the box, and to the rear. then check the images in the LCD, making sure the lens focused where you wanted it to. this only takes a couple minutes.</p>

 

[CvhKaar]

<p>Loise,<br>

Sounds like a good price for a nice lens if its a good copy.<br>

Should work nicely on a D7000 ( my neighbour has one of these too on his 1 week old d7000, and he's happy.....).<br>

Agree with Eric : test it if you can..<br>

There are some copies of this lens around that are very sharp, but also some not so good ones.<br>

Some suffer from a stiff zoom-ring ( this should be silky on this lens, but not all are..).</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Actually, I think Louise should think about this question. If the reason to buy a 24-70mm lens for the D7000 is in preparation for an FX body (the successor to the D700) in the future, we are talking about an FX DSLR that costs at least $2500 to perhaps somewhere over $3000. Are you really going to put a $300, old-generation Sigma lens on such an expensive body as your primary mid-range zoom?</p>

[eric_arnold]

<blockquote>

<p>Are you really going to put a $300, old-generation Sigma lens on such an expensive body as your primary mid-range zoom?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>why not? for the price, you can't really do better in a 2.8 standard zoom lens. even a 2.8 DX-only lens is $450 at the least expensive. and if it doesnt work out once the upgrade is made, louise can always sell the sigma and still get about $300 for it.</p>

<p>btw, there are plenty of people who use the 28-75 tamron or one of the sigma 24-XX lenses on FX bodies as either primary or secondary lenses with no complaints. sure, if you have the cash, the 24-70 nikkor is the bee's knees, but its better to have an FX-compatible lens at the time of upgrade than not, isn't it?</p>

<p>i use a $160 used sigma 15-30 on a $5000 D3s body with good (publishable) results so far -- good enough that the 14-24 is not a priority for me at this point. i'm pretty sure the camera doesnt know how much i paid for the lens.</p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<p>Eric, that is the fundamental issue we disagree. I would much rather spend more money on good lenses than putting inexpensive lenses on high-end bodies. I certainly have not used every lens out there, but I can usually tell the difference between good and bad lenses.</p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Sure. For the price. There's a reason Sigma lenses are cheaper, and it's not because the Sigma folks are more efficient, more altruistic, or less greedy. I went to Sears Point to take some pictures at 24 Hours of Lemons this weekend. Because my D200 hadn't arrived from APS yet, I used a friend's (barely used) D200. The Sigma stayed on the camera for paddock duty. I can tell the difference between a $400 Sigma and a $100 Nikon lens on a few generations old D200 handily. It ain't pretty. I got /some/ shots, but I also got some good shots with the 18-105. If you look through the Fred Miranda threads about Sigma lenses, 30% miss rate sounds about normal.</p>

<p>As far as I can tell, Sigma falls down compared to Nikon in terms of build quality (easily damaged paint, altho older EX lenses were worse), service (use of obsolete parts for repairs, piss poor diagnostic skills, and responsiveness), and handling (inconsistent AF across 2x D200 and 1x D90 with three copies of Sigma's 30/1.4). If that older Sigma lens has the 'Zen' coating, be prepared for it to come off in your hands. Yuck.</p>

<p>IMO, Louise should really reconsider skimping on the glass. The D7000 has a high enough pixel density that you will notice cheap lenses more readily. Unless there's some genuine need to get a full frame camera, save the $2500 or so and get a nice lens or two.</p>

[scott_ditzel1]

<p>Everyone can't afford the latest & greatest Nikkors & we need to consider that. The lens should work just fine on her camera. Yeah, sometimes there are problems when 3rd party vendors reverse engineer lenses to work on new cameras, but those problems are the exception, not the rule. Of course Nikon isn't going to want us to mount a 3rd party lens on their cameras as that takes money out of their pockets. That doesn't mean the lenses are not able to perform the way they are meant to. As long as she is aware of DX/FX issues with lenses, any recommendations as to lens compatibility should be answered honestly & without prejudice. We all have different expectations as well & what we want in a lens isn't necessarily going to be what the the next person wants.</p>

[louise1]

<p>thanks for all of these responses. I'll check out the Frank Miranda threads. So I do have a question about the expensive fx body being used with less expensive, or earlier generation glass. If this were the case, then shouldn't I simply discard my entire nikon lens line up, and start over with each new evolution of body? I am mindful that my more expensive glass (like the 17-55) is only a dx lens, and will be non working on an fx lens (which I might buy in the future). But what about my primes, my 24, 50, and 60? Some are well over 8 years old, and the 50 1.4 is about 5 years old. I've invested in both the brand and technology in Nikon, and glass. If the glass that I should not be factored in to future purchases, then I'm puzzled with something that is often argued on here that since someone has invested in a glass, why move over to canon, or sony et al. <br>

On the sigma lens in question. It's a lens that is only between 4 - 6 years old, and while it's under $300 now, surely a few years ago it was a lot more? If I were to go with the newer version, $500 more in cost, wouldn't we be having the same conversation about that lens in three years from now? <br>

While I don't have the FX body yet, and I do have the D7000, and I'm not likely to buy a DX lens at this point, but would have thought that a $300 for a mid range zoom was a decent buy, since it's a range I need to fill. <br>

And yes, I would be able to test out this lens to check for focus accuracies. Silly question, would focus issues show up in one body over another? So should I test on both the D200 and D7000? <br>

And I have noticed that it actually has some terrible reviews on Amazon for softness, although it seems to be for sale there. (not the HSM version)<br>

I am reading all of these responses, and I appreciate your time. </p>

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Scott: When you've already budgeted a few grand for a replacement body… saving a few hundred (or even a thousand) to skimp on lenses seems a bit silly. By virtue of being such a high resolution device, the D7000 will make it easier to spot the differences between mediocre lenses and good lenses. Of course… even current Sigma lenses have trouble (read: don't autofocus) with the D7000's live view. That's not subjective. Working just fine might be a bit of an overstatement.</p>

<p>I think what's being missed here is cheap as a term to describe lack of quality versus cheap as a term to describe price. If this were a discussion about a CV 58 vs a Zeiss 50, or a Zeiss 21 vs Nikon 14-24, I don't think there would be any doubt that the non-Nikon lenses are superb alternatives. But when you're talking about a Sigma lens…</p>

<p>Louise: I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not suggesting you buy all new lenses for an FX camera. If anything, the D7000 is going to be better able to take advantage of higher quality lenses than a D700 (and potentially its replacement). My thought is that you've already got an excellent camera, and you've not articulated any reasons for jumping to FX at you're nearest convenience. Perhaps you would see a bigger improvement in your enjoyment of photography (and/or your photos themselves) if you were to end up spending that wad of cash on nicer lenses (or a nicer lens). If you're willing to drop $800 on a Sigma, KEH has used 28-70s starting at $850 (w/o hood). I may be alone, but I'd buy a bargain grade top of the line Nikon from KEH before I'd buy a used Sigma (KEH grades conservatively so their bargain grade is usually in pretty nice shape).</p>

<p>As for focusing issues. Test the lens on the bodies you plan to use. Manufacturing tolerances, wear, features (live view) will certainly mean you'd get different results from the same lens (even a Nikon lens) on different bodies. The D7000 will let you adjust its autofocus to compensate for predictable problems (chronic back or front focusing), the D200 will not. </p>

[louise1]

Alex, thank you. That's helpful. The future jump to full frame is something I've been waiting to do for two years, but I don't want to buy

the D700 now when a new version might be out in the next 10-12 months. So the D7000 is my interim body. I've loved my D200

since 2006, but it's in need of a good cleaning and perhaps more. I chose to pick up the D7000 as I'm about to take a trip to western

Scotland where I want to do a lot of shooting, and even if a new full frame were announced tomorrow, supply would be iffy. The full

video is a nice plus on the fly and will be put to use on this trip documenting some older relatives and their stories. I'm not a

videographer so I don't want to buy a dedicated video system just for the occasional video opportunity.

 

That said, I think I'll skip the sigma for now, the softness factor is just not worth it. I have a tokina 12-24 which I love. The nikon 17-

55 which I love. A I'll bring - 24 and 50. I'm just looking for something a bit higher than the 50 range, but am mindful that in the future

there will be a full frame body in my life, so any new purchase needs to take that into consideration. I think that makes sense

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p> I'll upgrade to full frame whenever the next iteration of the D700 is out</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Louise, the main problem is that your target DSLR is an up-coming model that we have no specifications. It is very likely that the D700 will be updated this year, but its successor could be more expensive than $3000, and e.g. its pixel count is an unknown. Based on comments from Nikon themselves, I would expect them to introudce DSLRs with more than 12MP, but will that be 16, 18, 20 or 24MP, at least I have no idea. Therefore, whether this $300 Sigma lens will work well on that target DSLR is a complete unknown.</p>

<p>I think you are much better off using some good DX lenses on the D7000. IMO, it is never a good idea to buy a lens well in advance in preparation for some future DSLRs.</p>