Anyone here using the Sigma 24mm 1.8 on their D200? I am looking for a decent 24mm prime (other than the Nikon version). It looks a bit big, but seems smaller than my Nikon 17-55mm 2.8.
Don't have experience with the 24mm f1.8, but I do own the 28m f1.8. It's actually a decent lens, but obviously not as good as the Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 (which I also have.) I almost once bought the Sigma 20mm f1.8, but everyone I emailed who said they had owned one said it just didn't perform until it was stoppped down to f2.8+. Why would I buy a lens like that? I didn't. I now use the Sigma 30mm f1.4, and it is truly superb. It's better than any of the Nikon so-called "primes" in that range that I've owned (and now sold.) If 30mm is wide enough for what you want, it's a no-brainer. I use it on a D80 and D300. Bought used for $270.
Two23 wrote:
Don't have experience with the 24mm f1.8, but I do own the 28m f1.8. It's actually a decent lens, but obviously not as good as the Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 (which I also have.) I almost once bought the Sigma 20mm f1.8, but everyone I emailed who said they had owned one said it just didn't perform until it was stoppped down to f2.8+. Why would I buy a lens like that? I didn't. I now use the Sigma 30mm f1.4, and it is truly superb. It's better than any of the Nikon so-called "primes" in that range that I've owned (and now sold.) If 30mm is wide enough for what you want, it's a no-brainer. I use it on a D80 and D300. Bought used for $270.
Thanks for the feedback! I am happy with the performance of my small 35mm 2.0 AF-D prime, (my 17-55 seems to be getting heavier every day) but I'm looking for something in the 24mm range. A 30mm seems to close to a 35mm in terms of focal range.
There's the Zeiss 25mm f2.8, at $800 or so. You could try and snag a Sigma 24mm used here or on eBay. If it didn't do what you want, resell. However, it's f2.8 and probably no sharper than the 17-55mm f2.8 you already have.
Two23 wrote:
There's the Zeiss 25mm f2.8, at $800 or so. You could try and snag a Sigma 24mm used here or on eBay. If it didn't do what you want, resell. However, it's f2.8 and probably no sharper than the 17-55mm f2.8 you already have.
Kent in SD
Thanks again! I also have a manual focus Nikon 24mm 2.8 AIS; a very sharp lens! Problem is that I'm looking for a lighter set up with a small AF prime. While the 2.8 is not as fast as I'd like, I don't mind all that much.
I had what I thought was the ideal set up with the D200 and Nikon 24mm 2.8 AF-D, but I ended up having to return the lens because the lens didn't perform as I expected. The Sigma looks bigger and heavier than the Nikon 24mm 2.8 AF-D, but it is still smaller and lighter than the 17-55. When I mount the 17-55 on my D200 I have no choice but to place the battery grip (MB-D200) in order to have a well balanced camera; without the grip, the 17-55 feels too long and heavy for the small D200 body. Carrying this outfit (D200+battery grip+17-55) all day gets very tiresome after the first few hours of shooting. Since my EXIF info indicated that most of my images are shot around the 24mm range, I figured I could cut the weight down by sticking with the D200 (no grip) and a small 24mm AF prime. While I have used the D200 with my manual focus 24mm 2.8 AIS, I admit that I need AF now as my eyes are getting older.
I don't have the 24 1.8 but I do have the Siggy 20 1.8 and I think it is a great lens. I was also skeptical about this lens based on reviews I had seen but it looks like the reviews are negative towards the first version of this lens rather than the later versions. I think the colors out of this lens are fantastic. It is not razor sharp at 1.8 as expected, but definitely useable. Here are some random pics that are not the greatest with the 20, don't have details with me:
WOW....after looking at these on here they kinda look like crap compared to lightroom.....oh well
I second the 20mm. I have one and it is a good combo. Love the 20mm on D200 300 etc as it is close to the 28mm focal length I love on full frame. Great price on this lens also.
