~andy1349

Audio Engineer/Photographer

Profile

Gallery

Prints

Faves

Journal

Lens

Wed Jan 21, 2009, 9:56 AM

I think its time to upgrade from the kit lens that came with my D40. While its one of the best lenses Nikon makes, with excellent results at fast apertures and an impressive focusing distance for macro work, its just not wide enough for proper landscape work, which i'm rather keen on at the moment.

There are 3 potential candidates for an upgrade.
Sigma 10-20mm
Tamron 10-24mm
Nikon 12-24mm

I would get the Nikon ideally, but its almost twice what both the others cost, unless I go B-stock, which im not too keen on from previous experiences with B-stock audio equipment. But its Nikon quality, and I can be pretty certain it will do everything I could ever want with minimum distortion.

The Tamron is slightly faster than the sigma, but is ever so slightly soft at that fast aperture. But I tried one today and it wasn't unbearable. And the zoom range is the best of all 3 lenses.

The Sigma is the cheapest, with poor construction, but good optics at all apertures. But is only about £30 cheaper than the tamron anyway.

Anyone want to try and swing me one way or the other?

My Best Friend in the world

Friends:

Clubs:

14 Comments

Mood: Stuck

Devious Comments

~~love 0 0~~

~~joy 0 0~~

~~wow 0 0~~

~~mad 0 0~~

~~sad 0 0~~

~~fear 0 0~~

~~neutral 0 0~~

=chriscx1 Jan 21, 2009, 10:28:03 AM

will you use it often or not ?

if yes, buy the nikon one.

I dont know about sigma or tamron, a lot of people speak about sigma 10-20...

i can have the nikon for 894,398 GBP

--
What I See Is not What I Get
____________
[link]

~andy1349 Jan 21, 2009, 11:25:26 AM

yeah, nikon would be best, but is it really twice as good as the sigma or tamron as the price suggests, thats my problem.

--
"I hear what you're saying lois, but unlike my credit card, i'm carrying a very low rate of interest" Peter Griffin

=chriscx1 Jan 21, 2009, 11:33:05 AM

well i just heard about the sigma, never about the tamron.
this guy has the sigma, if I remember well:
[link]

--
What I See Is not What I Get
____________
[link]

~andy1349 Jan 21, 2009, 11:34:45 AM

yeah, ive actually spoken to him already, and hes very keen on the sigma. Im gonna try and look for somewhere that sells the sigma so i can have a go. Tried the tamron earlier today and was very impressed if im honest. It felt sharp and the optics werent as bad as i feared. Very well constructed as well

to be honest, the nikon isnt really an option, its too expensive for me

--
"I hear what you're saying lois, but unlike my credit card, i'm carrying a very low rate of interest" Peter Griffin

*taffmeister Jan 21, 2009, 12:37:03 PM

I bought the sigma when I was using the D40 and it instantly improved things 200% my friend crowthius

bought the same lense. It's fast and accurate focusing wise, I dont see any problem with the construction, it's opticaly easily as good as the Nikon and Tamron. I don't have a problem with it and there are many here on dA who use it to great effect.

~andy1349 Jan 21, 2009, 1:28:27 PM

thats the general feeling im getting, that the sigma is pretty good. im gonna try and find a place that sells one so i can get some proper hands-on experience with it.

thank you for the feedback

cant rush buying something that will last for 20 years hopefully

--
"I hear what you're saying lois, but unlike my credit card, i'm carrying a very low rate of interest" Peter Griffin

~41010 Jan 21, 2009, 9:54:20 PM

DigitalFoto, Scandinavians largest photo-mag just had a test on wide angles. Nikon 12-24 got 88%. This was the highest % in the test, an Nikon lost a lot of % because if the price, so obviously, it's damn god.

I still like my Sigma 10-20mm

84%

--
Founder of SonyAlpha
My portfolio, my girl
Please, give me a ^^ Kindly given cookies so far: 448

~andy1349 Jan 22, 2009, 4:33:37 AM

was the tamron there for comparison?

--
"I hear what you're saying lois, but unlike my credit card, i'm carrying a very low rate of interest" Peter Griffin