28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
1 2 3 end

lsutigerfan
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #1 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Goshdamnit!! What a SHARP, beautiful-image-rendering piece of hardware! Gonna get mine soon.

Jan 09, 2013 at 04:26 AM

umsl12
Online
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #2 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Amazing samples , At8282 ! This lens is so sharp wide open !

Price + image quality > brand name. Why it has to be " Nikon" on the lens

Jan 09, 2013 at 04:27 PM

BenV
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #3 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

umsl12 wrote:
Amazing samples , At8282 ! This lens is so sharp wide open !

Price + image quality > brand name. Why it has to be " Nikon" on the lens

people become fans of brands, and get offended when a better product is offered, and its cheaper on top of that.

Jan 09, 2013 at 04:58 PM

jim allison
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #4 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Talk to me in three years and let me know what the Sigma lens is worth? Please also let me know if it is still making great images. Yes, the nikon lens is overpriced, but not so much when you consider the depreciation and no, I don't own either of them. That's why I said let me know in three years. By then, Sigma may have improved enough to become a truly respected brand. IMHO only time will tell.

Jan 09, 2013 at 09:48 PM

NikonGuyIsHere
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Sigma is a respected brand already. Their 50mm and 85mm lenses take a back seat to no one, and many people think they are better. Same with 35mm

If I was Nikon or Canon, I would be afraid.

Jan 09, 2013 at 10:15 PM

BenV
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #6 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

jim allison wrote:
Talk to me in three years and let me know what the Sigma lens is worth? Please also let me know if it is still making great images. Yes, the nikon lens is overpriced, but not so much when you consider the depreciation and no, I don't own either of them. That's why I said let me know in three years. By then, Sigma may have improved enough to become a truly respected brand. IMHO only time will tell.

Sigma doesn't depreciate anymore than Nikon does. Glass typically has a 10-20% value loss and stays there unless the lens get damaged.

Jan 09, 2013 at 10:27 PM

trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #7 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

I don't own either of them

then why freakin' post a reply

Jan 09, 2013 at 10:50 PM

Jun Zhou
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

I love my sigma 50mm 1.4 so I really don't care about depreciation.

Jan 09, 2013 at 10:53 PM

phlegmon
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #9 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

I own both the Nikon 50 1.4 D and Sigma 50. I prefer the image quality of the Sigma. Haven't used the Nikon G so I can't comment on that.

Once I get the Sigma 35, I'm going to get rid of at least one of the 50s. Maybe both. Been too lazy to do it.

Jan 09, 2013 at 11:27 PM

MackDaddy1962
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #10 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Jun Zhou wrote:
I love my sigma 50mm 1.4 so I really don't care about depreciation.

x2. Bought one around Xmas last year and could not be happier. I'm going to get the new Siggy 35/1.4 come he!! or high water...

Jan 09, 2013 at 11:38 PM

jim allison
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #11 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Hi Trenchmonkey,
To answer your question, I posted a reply because I wanted to be fair to Sigma. That's why I said
let me know in three years. Sigma recognizes that they have serious quality control problems.
That's why all the PR about improved quality.They are a prolific manufacturer who have a reputation in the trade of dumping product and inconsistant quality. I'm glad that many enjoy their Sigma lenses and hope that they will still be enjoying them in three years.

Jan 10, 2013 at 01:37 AM

jim allison
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Hi Ben V,
I don't think you really know what you are talking about. Just because you are willing to buy a used lens for 10% less then a new one, doesn't mean that other people will also do so. By the way,all lenses,unless they are red hot and hard to get, depreciate at least 20% the moment they are driven off the lot. Off brand lenses, excluding Zeiss, depreciate even more. Sigma depreciates the most because of it's reputation for greater variation from copy to copy and the risk of that variation that the buyer assumes.I'm not a fanboy of any product as Joe Friday would say"those are just the facts." I don't know what you do for a living, but I was a rep and sales manager in the wholesale photo equipment industry.I started working as a Nikon tech rep in 1970, before that I worked in retail camera stores from the age of fifteen.I have probably bought and sold, for my own personal use, in excess of 100,000 worth of equipment over my life time,so I have a bit of expertise in this area.

Jan 10, 2013 at 02:09 AM

curious80
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

jim allison wrote:
Hi Ben V,
I don't think you really know what you are talking about. Just because you are willing to buy a used lens for 10% less then a new one, doesn't mean that other people will also do so. By the way,all lenses,unless they are red hot and hard to get, depreciate at least 20% the moment they are driven off the lot. Off brand lenses, excluding Zeiss, depreciate even more. Sigma depreciates the most because of it's reputation for greater variation from copy to copy and the risk of that variation that the buyer assumes.I'm not a fanboy of any product as Joe Friday would say"those are just the facts." I don't know what you do for a living, but I was a rep and sales manager in the wholesale photo equipment industry.I started working as a Nikon tech rep in 1970, before that I worked in retail camera stores from the age of fifteen.I have probably bought and sold, for my own personal use, in excess of 100,000 worth of equipment over my life time,so I have a bit of expertise in this area.

So you are telling me that just because Sigma 35mm 1. 4 would loose about $100-150 more in 3 years compared to Nikon 28mm 1.8, OP should remain stuck for 3 years with a lens which might not be his preferred choice instead of a lens which is exactly what he needs based on his liking of 35L? You realize that his camera would loose more than $1000 in the same period. It makes no economic sense to buy a $3000 camera which would be $1500 in 3 years and then not pair it with the lens that I need just to save $150 over 3 years.

Jan 10, 2013 at 02:29 AM

georgms
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #14 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

jim allison wrote:
Hi Ben V,
I don't think you really know what you are talking about. Just because you are willing to buy a used lens for 10% less then a new one, doesn't mean that other people will also do so. By the way,all lenses,unless they are red hot and hard to get, depreciate at least 20% the moment they are driven off the lot. Off brand lenses, excluding Zeiss, depreciate even more. Sigma depreciates the most because of it's reputation for greater variation from copy to copy and the risk of that variation that the buyer assumes.I'm not a fanboy of any product as Joe Friday would say"those are just the facts." I don't know what you do for a living, but I was a rep and sales manager in the wholesale photo equipment industry.I started working as a Nikon tech rep in 1970, before that I worked in retail camera stores from the age of fifteen.I have probably bought and sold, for my own personal use, in excess of 100,000 worth of equipment over my life time,so I have a bit of expertise in this area.

^ Very well said!

to lsutigerfan: the Sigma 35/1.4 seems to be a really good 35mm-lens, but the 28/1.8G is a pretty good 28mm-lens that will double as a nice "pseudo 35/1.8" in 1.2-crop-mode ;-) Unfortunately there's no 0.8-blow-up-mode available...

Jan 10, 2013 at 02:32 AM

BenV
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #15 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

jim allison wrote:
Hi Ben V,
I don't think you really know what you are talking about. Just because you are willing to buy a used lens for 10% less then a new one, doesn't mean that other people will also do so. By the way,all lenses,unless they are red hot and hard to get, depreciate at least 20% the moment they are driven off the lot. Off brand lenses, excluding Zeiss, depreciate even more. Sigma depreciates the most because of it's reputation for greater variation from copy to copy and the risk of that variation that the buyer assumes.I'm not a fanboy of any product as Joe Friday would say"those are just the facts." I don't know what you do for a living, but I was a rep and sales manager in the wholesale photo equipment industry.I started working as a Nikon tech rep in 1970, before that I worked in retail camera stores from the age of fifteen.I have probably bought and sold, for my own personal use, in excess of 100,000 worth of equipment over my life time,so I have a bit of expertise in this area.

I'd like to see where you get your 'facts' from that Sigma depreciates the most. Opinions are not facts. Look at the sold items here on FM boards. I hate to inform you, but glass takes a loss ('almost' like everything else), but its just a piece of glass, there's not much newer technology to put into it. The Sigma 50 1.4 is $449 brand new. It sells for (on the b/s section) for $350. So your telling me in 3 years, its going to drop further? Unless someone scratches it, or damages the lens, it won't drop anymore.

So again, please provide me some 'facts', link me to something solid, give me some real examples other than 'you worked in a store'. I've worked in retail as well.

Jan 10, 2013 at 03:40 AM

NikonGuyIsHere
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

The Sigma 85mm is holding value pretty well.

Jan 10, 2013 at 04:50 AM

Erik Moore
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Gregg Heckler wrote:
Hmmm, that doesn't sound too great to me for $900. Hopefully the second will work for you though. But I guess you get what you pay for.

If you've never had problems with Nikon or Canon glass, you either haven't owned enough of it, you've been very very lucky, or you're not paying attention.

You get what you pay for? Tell that to a Land Rover owner.

Jan 10, 2013 at 08:47 PM

jim allison
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #18 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Hi Ben,
I'm not going to bang my head against the wall trying to taech you something. My credentials speak for themselves. Good luck with all your purchases. Everyone has right to their own opinion.It's just that somepeoples are more informed then others.I don't thnik that you read or understand what I have written. It's not that I worked in a store, it's that I was a NYC photo rep
selling lenses any other equipment for many years.What's your authority? You are either an amteur or professional photographer, in other words a consumer who thinks he knows about
how the photoequipment industry works and doesn't know anythig at all about it.

Edited on Jan 10, 2013 at 11:03 PM · View previous versions

Jan 10, 2013 at 10:50 PM

Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

Sigma is actually making 28mm f1.8 too. Which suprisingly is tiny bit better than Nikon version (CA, bit less distortion). And cheap.

35mm f1.4 is lens designed for super-demanding SD1M sensor and it shows nicely on regular dSLRs aswell. Shame they dont make less noisy FF Foveon..

If you are like me (eg. dont like 35mm lens), then I would try either Sigma or something different (there are alternatives, lots of them, in manual focus world..).

Jan 10, 2013 at 10:59 PM

BenV
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #20 · 28/1.8G or Sima 35/1.4??

jim allison wrote:
Hi Ben,
I'm not going to bang my head against the wall trying to taech you something. My credentials speak for themselves. Good luck with all your purchases. Everyone has right to their own opinion.It's just that somepeoples are more informed then others.I don't thnik that you read or understand what I have written. It's not that I worked in a store, it's that I was a NYC photo rep
selling lenses any other equipment for many years.What's your authority? You are either an amteur or professional photographer, in other words a consumer who thinks he knows about
how the photoequipment industry works and doesn't know anythig at all about it.

That's fine. While I appreciate your little jabs at me to attempt to insult my knowledge, I'll just be the bigger man and walk away. You keep throwing claims out there without any proof. Good day sir.

Jan 11, 2013 at 03:14 AM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end