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

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8
  
 
patrick04
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


I'm starting to plan my next lens purchase and I would like to hear from people who have used one (or both) of these lenses. I'm probably going to pick one or the other, but maybe there is another comparable lens that I haven't thought of yet…?

I'll be using the lens on a D7000 mostly indoors at home, for pictures of kids and pets, and also out at family events etc. I already have the Nikon 35mm f/1.8 but I'd like something a bit wider, which is why I'm considering these two lenses.

I am drawn to the 24mm because of its small size and price, and I like the Sigma because of the zoom range and bigger aperture. My impression is that the IQ of the Sigma is better than the Nikon but maybe not by that much? I don't plan to upgrade to FX any time soon so it doesn't really matter to me that the Sigma is DX only.

I will probably end up renting both lenses before I buy, but in the meantime it would be nice to hear from anyone who has hands-on experience with either lens.

(p.s. I'm not in a hurry to buy, so I don't mind waiting until the Sigma comes in stock somewhere…)



Jan 07, 2014 at 12:34 AM
chuhsi1
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


A few thoughts.

i think your decision point should actually be the 28 1.8 used for $500 or a new 18-35 for $800. While the 24 is a nice size, i've read that it's a good but not great lens these days. However, there's no alternative for a 24mm prime unless you want to buy the $2k 24mm 1.4 (which is awesome..i love mine).

Also note that 2.8 isn't really that fast for indoor for pictures of kids and pets (assuming no flash).

the sigma is an awesome lens. but check to see if you're ok with the size and weight. i was going to buy it and was very surprised for how hefty it is.



Jan 07, 2014 at 12:46 AM
Kyyo24
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


Wasn't the 24 f2.8 pretty crappy? Or was that the 28?


Jan 07, 2014 at 01:56 AM
Reagan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


The 28 af is bad on any camera but the 28 ais is one of the best MF lens
I use a 24 Ais on DX and like it alot

Reagan




Jan 07, 2014 at 01:59 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



hijazist
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


Kyyo24 wrote:
Wasn't the 24 f2.8 pretty crappy? Or was that the 28?


The one that has a notorious reputation is the 28 2.8 AF-D, although in my experience I found it quite decent for the price. I just didn't like the FL.



Jan 07, 2014 at 02:00 AM
patrick04
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


I forgot about the 28 f/1.8G. I had been considering that one but I keep thinking it wouldn't be that much wider than my 35 f/1.8G (since I would be shooting it on DX). I still might want to check it out though, as I've heard very good things about it... And if I ever went FX it would be perfect.

I've read that the Nikon 20mm and 28mm f/2.8D lenses aren't that great but that the 24mm f/2.8D is very good.



Jan 07, 2014 at 02:44 AM
Smiert Spionam
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


The 24/2.8 is adequate, but not special. It's real charm on DX is that it gives you a compact 35mm-equivalent FOV. Optically, it's not better than any number of inexpensive Nikon DX zooms, and it will be outclassed by the Sigma.


Jan 07, 2014 at 05:45 AM
gyoung143
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Nikon 24mm f/2.8D vs. Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8


I have been using the 24/2.8 AF on film for 20 years and its a good lens, but on my D7000 its disapointing, needs stopping down to 6.3 or 8 to get reasonably sharp in the corners. According to Photozone its probably to do with pixel density so would presumably be even worse on the 24mp DX cameras. I did some quick tests against my friends zooms, and both the 18-55 and 18-135 kit lenses were better at the edges at 24mm and the wider apertures. A great disapointment as I had hoped to use it as a compact 35mm equivalent
I went for the Tamron 17-50/2.8, the non VC version which is smaller, cheaper and supposedly sharper. I am happy with the performance although regret the bulk. I do wish Nikon or someone else would give us some good DX wideangle primes.
The question of the 28s is a bit more complicated, the original 28/2.8 AF was supposedly the old E lens and not good, but when they went to AFD it was redesigned I think and is reputedly better, I have no experience, I don't use 28mm much and the only one I have for Nikon is an ancient Tamron AiS mount which is OK stopped down.

Gerry



Jan 07, 2014 at 02:02 PM





FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password