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

1
       2       3       end
  

Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'
  
 
m.sommers00
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


These are two very similar lenses. I own the 24-120 but wondering if the 24-105 will have any improvements in contrast, distortion, bokeh and sharpness over the Nikon. I'm assuming the new Sigma can use the dock to calibrate focus? Given the large zoom range of this lens, that seems extremely useful.


Mar 21, 2014 at 08:52 AM
ocir
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


DXOMark gave the Sigma a higher score than both the Nikon and Canon equivalents. I'm actually thinking of getting the Sigma myself but I will wait until there are more reviews on a Nikon body.



Mar 21, 2014 at 11:14 AM
jwpstl
Offline

Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


This reviewer claims the Nikon is sharper:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1658/cat/31

Nikon 24-120mm /4G ED VR AF-S Nikkor ~$1,296.95
The Nikon alternative is actually a bit more versatile than the Sigma with its longer zoom -- out to 120mm -- all the while keeping the constant /4 aperture. Like the Sigma, the Nikon also has image stabilization. The Nikon lens is also quite sharp -- a bit better than the Sigma -- and also better at controlling vignetting at 24mm. The Sigma, however, shows better results at controlling CA in most cases, the Nikon beating it slightly at telephoto. Like the Canon, though, the street price of the Nikon lens is also much higher than the Sigma.



Mar 21, 2014 at 04:02 PM
Chris Dees
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


The Sigma has a few drawbacks to start with; 15mm shorter and 82mm filter size. It's a little bulkier and heavier, but it's cheaper.
Distortion (even contrast) is not a real problem in PP. I'm not sure how about bokeh, the Nikon is not too bad.
In some reviews it seems sharper in others not.
Sounds like a lottery for a little more sharpness and perhaps a little better bokeh. I'll pass, I'm not going to sell mine for the Sigma.



Mar 21, 2014 at 07:17 PM
tabrink
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


Interesting .. no really hilarious..the fanboy reaction to the cheap current take your money Nikon plastic offerings and all the fan boy reasons.. 15mm more and 82mm filter almost spit my coffee out..Excuse me.. Who shoots at 120mm who normally for twenty years shot at 105MM and uses it to trash a lens? You have never even held an ART lens and you trash it..
Besides being sharper, better colors, better OS have you bothered to even consider the robust build quality of the Sigma ART series.
Hilarious.. not naming names but dudes this is so freaking lame! You got nary a clue.. I have both offerings in hand right now! Plastic consumer grade heading to sleasebay. Do not buy it.. so average..
Hand both lens to the complete village idiot and he will pick the best 100% of the time.
Oh trust me Nikon will never know you picked a better value product because they do not care//
I am a 45 year Nikon shooter



Mar 22, 2014 at 03:53 AM
NikonGuyIsHere
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


One thing to consider is the Sigma zooms opposite of Nikon. Can get frustrating


Mar 22, 2014 at 04:54 AM
Todd Warnke
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


I borrowed a friends 24-120 and his 24-105 and shot them off against my 24-70. Same settings, f/4, f/5.6, f/8 and f/11. Inside and outside. 15 feet and infinity. On my D800E. All lenses at 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm. I tried the Sigma and 24-120 at 105mm as well. Tripod mounted for all shots. Yeah, I can be a geek at times. Since I was looking for an alternative to the 24-70 for backpacking I paid special consideration to the corners but my overall impressions are as follows.

To my eyes the 24-70 was sharper across the frame at least up till f/8 when center sharpness was fairly equal with all the lenses though 24-70 was still superior in the corners. It also had better contrast than the 24-120 and colors as well. The Sigma has excellent contrast at f/4, on par with the 24-70, but by f/5.6 was no different than the 24-120 and behind the 24-70. In the corners at f/4 the Sigma had slightly better contrast then the 24-120, but was not sharper. At all other apertures the 24-120 was either sharper or no worse than the Sigma in the corners with similar contrast levels. Overall, the 24-70 was simply superior in terms of sharpness across the frame, contrast and color. The Sigma was generally sharper in the center of the frame than the 24-120, but with the exception of f/4, the 24-120 was sharper in the corners and so a better fit for landscape work. Distortion levels varied among the lenses, but none exhibited any issues that proper PP could not cleanly address.

My conclusion was that if I wanted the best shots possible I need to work out more and carry the 24-70, which comes in at 900 grams but is a better lens in every parameter that I find important than the other two. The 24-105 is darn near as heavy at 885 grams, has that awkward 82mm filter size and offers no real visual gain over the 24-120, which is much lighter (670 grams), though not in the same build class as the Sigma. That puts a lot against the Sigma - as heavy as the 24-70, not as sharp nor able to shoot at f/2.8, though it can go to 105mm and has VR. OTOH, the 24-120 is far lighter, goes even further than the 24-105 (though that last 15mm isn't all that much), is as sharp and uses the same filters as the rest of my main lenses and also has VR. In the end I passed on both the 24-105 and the 24-120, but if I were to get one of the two the Nikon would be my first choice as a landscape lens. YMMV if you have a different set of priorities than mine.

Peace,

Todd



Mar 22, 2014 at 05:55 AM
Chris Dees
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


I'm glad you didn't spoiled your coffee.
Fanboy? Where does it say I'm trashing the Sigma?
I only said the differences where not enough for me to swap the lenses.
I think you need to take a deep breath and another coffee to calm down.



Mar 22, 2014 at 08:21 AM
gfinlayson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


I've recently acquired the Sigma 24-105, but having moved house within the last week, I've not had much opportunity to use it properly.

My initial impressions though are that it's plenty sharp enough even wide open, colour rendition is so close to my Nikon primes it's not worthy of further mention, AF is fast and very quiet. The strangest thing is the OS, it's so silent, I thought mine was broken at first. Sharp hand helds at 1/30 at 105mm on a D800 proved otherwise, though.

I considered the Nikon 24-120, but opted for the Sigma instead.

Why?

Optically, I've yet to see a proper comparison against the 24-120 on a D800 or a D7100, but I expect it's going to be at least as good. The Canon version is at least as good as the 24-105 f/4 L, so for now we'll call it a draw.

Price-wise it's cheaper than the Nikon, but it takes 82mm filters and a decent CPL will take care of the saving, so let's call that a draw.

Build quality is where the differences really start to show. The Sigma is big, heavy, solid and superbly engineered. It feels like it's built to take a lifetime of professional abuse. The Nikon, on the other hand feels like one of the throw-away kit lenses that come with consumer DX bodies. Here, in the UK, the Sigma carries a three-year warranty vs one year for Nikon. Value for money, the Sigma wins hands down.

The huge difference many overlook with the new Sigma lenses is the USB dock. Naysayers like to shout that it's Sigma's way of compensating for sloppy quality control. I call BS on that. Sigma has come up with a proper solution to compensate for the ever increasing demands high resolution sensors are placing on phase detect AF systems. Nikon bodies have offered AF fine tune for a few years, but it's a single adjustment. I've yet to find a zoom that needs the same adjustment across its full range, and most lenses have variations with focus distance. Sigma's dock allows tuning at no less than four focal lengths on zooms at no less than four focus distances, letting you dial in a lens near perfectly for all conditions. For me, this is a winner.

Firmware can also be updated to keep lenses working with future camera bodies, something Sigma has been criticised for in the past (although to be fair they will usually re-chip current lenses for free, if needed).

Sigma has entered a new era - they're concentrating on quality and performance, and their recent offerings show they can make lenses at least as good as and in some cases better than Nikon and Canon at very competitive price points.

The die-hard fan boys will still benefit, because it will force Nikon and Canon to innovate and compete to maintain sales.




Mar 22, 2014 at 09:14 AM
thursdaylsr
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


tabrink wrote:
Interesting .. no really hilarious..the fanboy reaction to the cheap current take your money Nikon plastic offerings and all the fan boy reasons.. 15mm more and 82mm filter almost spit my coffee out..Excuse me.. Who shoots at 120mm who normally for twenty years shot at 105MM and uses it to trash a lens? You have never even held an ART lens and you trash it..
Besides being sharper, better colors, better OS have you bothered to even consider the robust build quality of the Sigma ART series.
Hilarious.. not naming names but dudes this is so freaking lame! You got nary
...Show more

This was completely unwarranted.. I rarely post and never butt into conversation but couldn't help it right now. Guy gives his opinion and then you bash him? Not only that, but you have the nerve to say "not naming names" when you're four posts into a thread where one person has said something that is opposite of your opinion? I'm glad to see you contradict yourself by appearing as a fan boy with your stark defense of the ART lens - we can read three letters my friend, the capitalization multiple times is unnecessary. I'm probably a fanboy now because I wouldn't consider a 24-105 because of the exact same reasons, I'm a working photojournalist that sees each lens and body as a tool, not an elitist like you. The extra 15mm means getting the shot for me. The filters being the same size is a nice convenience even though I rarely use them. I'm going to chalk your post up to a drink or two too many seeing the time it was posted, or you're just an angry, angry person who shouldn't hang out on the internet so much.



Mar 22, 2014 at 02:12 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



liionel88
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


cant wait to have an actual hands on with this bad boy!


Mar 22, 2014 at 03:45 PM
Jonathan
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


I've owned the Nikon 24-120 and sold it because I never cared for it. I currently have the new Sigma 24-105 as well as the Nikon 24-70.

I really love the new Sigma(much better(imho) than the Nikon's 24-120) but find that I just can't part with the 24-70 although the range of the Sigma is great as well as the build quality and lots of other things including the dock feature.

Sooo, my new Sigma just hit the FS forum and I'm keeping my 24-70. Can't afford to have both and use one.



Mar 22, 2014 at 08:32 PM
gfinlayson
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


The Sigma 24-105 and the Nikon 24-70 are definitely very different beasts. The Nikon is great where you need a fast aperture zoom. The Sigma is ideal as a studio lens and allows easy switching between tight headshots and full length shots as well as anything in between which is why I bought mine. No need for f/2.8 with studio flash either


Mar 22, 2014 at 11:00 PM
Birdbrooks
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


gfinlayson wrote:
The Sigma 24-105 and the Nikon 24-70 are definitely very different beasts. The Nikon is great where you need a fast aperture zoom. The Sigma is ideal as a studio lens and allows easy switching between tight headshots and full length shots as well as anything in between which is why I bought mine. No need for f/2.8 with studio flash either


Agreed. I have had a great time using this lens for studio portraiture. But of course it does a lot more, and I'm surprised this lens is not seeing more love in the forums. The build quality is outstanding, the fast and silent zoom, sharpness of images, and more!

My main use for this lens is as for street walk-around shooting; it is so versatile. The argument that a prime is useful in forcing one to compose for the shot more thoroughly, moving forward or back to compose carries a lot of merit... but there are many times when a scene begs to be shot in multiple focal lengths. This lens really shines at that, as it is strong throughout the range.



Jun 13, 2014 at 02:31 AM
EB-1
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


ocir wrote:
DXOMark gave the Sigma a higher score than both the Nikon and Canon equivalents. I'm actually thinking of getting the Sigma myself but I will wait until there are more reviews on a Nikon body.


My experience with the Sigma was very disappointing. The center was quite sharp, but the periphery did not sharpen enough even at smaller apertures. The CA was really too high for me as well. I rarely return lenses, but that was one.

EBH



Jun 13, 2014 at 03:44 AM
Frogfish
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


I can't compare the 24-105 against the Nikon, never having owned the later, but I am very pleasantly surprised by the Sigma. I sold the kit 24-85VR for this one.

Sharp / Colours : indeed it is - everywhere, I've used it for landscape, people and for the reason I bought it : as a general walkaround lens when carrying my big birding kit with me. I find the colours more Canon than Nikon but easy to adjust in PP.

Build : superb. If I am paying this much for a lens then I expect it to be of a high quality build, it is. If anyone reading this has the 35/1.4 then it's similar in size, weight and cosmetics, I often pick up the wrong one by mistake they are so similar.

VR & AF : fast and absolutely silent. As someone else also mentioned above, I mistakenly thought the AF/VR was not working they are that quiet.

CA/Distortion : have not noticed any major issues at all, minor CA is very easily corrected in LR/PS.

82mm filter size : for me not an issue because that's the same as the Zeiss 21mm. Not sure if using a 77mm filter with a step-up ring would introduce too much vignetting but worth a try even if you only have to make a very slight trim in PP.

70mm vs 105mm vs 120mm : for me the 70 to 105/120 is too big a gap. However 105 to 120 feels like nothing at all, especially when you have the cropping ability of a D800 (E) and probably on a D600(610) too.

Price : no brainer. Overall it's an excellent lens.



Jun 13, 2014 at 05:09 AM
Alan321
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


The 82mm filter diameter may not be an issue if you don't use filters, but consider that you may not be able to use a ring flash or Nikon R1C1 flash system with this diameter.

That would not stop me buying a Sigma 24-105 but it has stopped me buying their 180 macro.

The Nikon 24-120VR is a very handy lens to have when travelling light but it is not excellent. Some focal length / distance combinations are noticeably than others.

The Nikon 24-70 is a sharper lens and also does f/2.8 but it lacks VR and so I generally prefer to use the 24-120VR. It will depend on how and what you shoot.

Being an "Art" lens, the Sigma 24-105 is tweakable with their USB lens dock. You can tune the focus at different focal lengths. That has to be a good thing and I'll be very happy if and when the big boys produce a similar capability for their existing lenses.

PhotoZone have a test of the Canon-mount version of the Sigma at http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/864-sigma24105f4eos?start=1

In my opinion the mixed results significant pros and cons make it a tough call. Luckily, I already have the 24-120VR.

- Alan



Jun 13, 2014 at 06:37 AM
NathanHamler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


NikonGuyIsHere wrote:
One thing to consider is the Sigma zooms opposite of Nikon. Can get frustrating


Yup, wont even touch one, simply cause of this...super freaking annoying...i imagine canon shooters feel the same about Tokina zoom lenses....



Jun 13, 2014 at 11:16 AM
GOVA
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


tabrink wrote:
Interesting .. no really hilarious..the fanboy reaction to the cheap current take your money Nikon plastic offerings and all the fan boy reasons.. 15mm more and 82mm filter almost spit my coffee out..Excuse me.. Who shoots at 120mm who normally for twenty years shot at 105MM and uses it to trash a lens? You have never even held an ART lens and you trash it..
Besides being sharper, better colors, better OS have you bothered to even consider the robust build quality of the Sigma ART series.
Hilarious.. not naming names but dudes this is so freaking lame! You got nary
...Show more

It is quite refreshing to see that somebody in this forum has balls.

Great post.



Jun 13, 2014 at 01:51 PM
Lance B
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Nikon 24-120 vs. Sigma 24-105 'A'


tabrink wrote:
Interesting .. no really hilarious..the fanboy reaction to the cheap current take your money Nikon plastic offerings and all the fan boy reasons.. 15mm more and 82mm filter almost spit my coffee out..Excuse me.. Who shoots at 120mm who normally for twenty years shot at 105MM and uses it to trash a lens? You have never even held an ART lens and you trash it..
Besides being sharper, better colors, better OS have you bothered to even consider the robust build quality of the Sigma ART series.
Hilarious.. not naming names but dudes this is so freaking lame! You got nary
...Show more

, I think someone just blew a fuse.



Jun 13, 2014 at 01:59 PM
1
       2       3       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password