Into the dark side with Sigma on a Nikon
In this post I list out the few good sigma lenses that are worth the money.
After wondering for many years how a company like sigma could still survive despite having so many lenses that I just didnt like, I decided to research specific sigma lenses in the semi-pro to professional line up & check if they were worth it.
Luckily, I found a few that were, & can be had second-hand for a fraction of the price of their Nikon counterparts. The challenge is knowing these gems & staying away from the other sigma stuff.
In this article I list the Sigma stuff that is really worth it:
1) Sigma 8-16mm DX super ultrawide
This is the worlds widest lens, so wide that despite being on DX, it is wider than every other FX 35mm ultrawide ever made. Every mm of width down the low end is worth getting. This was the first Sigma product that begged me to look into this brand a bit more.2) Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 DX
This lens is marketed as an in-expensive upgrade to your 18-55mm kit lens, which is exactly what it is, & does that job very well. Sure it isnt as good as the 24-70mm f2.8 below, as per my previous post comparing those 2 lenses. But none the less, it is a worthy light weight lens for someone who wants acarry around travel lens that does decent low light work with nice shallow depth of field & great bokeh as well as good colour rendition & rendition of out of focus spots. It has a built in AF motor so will work on even the cheapest of bodies. And doesnt suffer from the horrible focus grinding issues that other sigmas have.3) Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 D zoom
Probably the best lens for clean bokeh & a colour rendition so good that it actually competes with Nikon! If you want to go pro with a budget of a newbie, this lens is a must have.Weighs a tank, like it should, focuses decently but will rely on the AF motor in your camera.
This is NOT a bad thing. Its a myth that body driven AF is slower, which is complete non-sense, infact several new AF motor lenses are infact markedly slower.
4) Sigma 70-200mm HSM f2.8 II (version 2 of the lens with the newer HSM motor I believe)
This lens isnt as good as the Nikon wide open at f2.8, but to be fairm no f2.8 zoom is. They are all a little soft at f2.8 when you start counting pixels.
But the good thing is that this lens improves quite a bit with just f3.2 onwards. And f3.2 @ 200mm is really not much to complain about.
The best thing about this lens is that the focus in really good. The first sigma lens with an HSM motor that really is comparable to Nikon's fast SWM motors.
It doesnt focus hunt & go mad with moving subjects either.
Decent colour rendition, not the best, but adequate at half a Nikons price.
Very nice background blur, & the bokeh is quite ok, though Nikons 70-200 f2.8 VR is the killer in bokeh as well as skin tone rendition.
5) Sigma 100-300mm F4 HSM
This lens didnt impress me as much as I had hoped, but I'll leave it on the list because it does do a good job.
Its big, because F4 @ 300mm needs 'big'. Its acceptable sharpness for its price, but there is room to desire more. It didnt impress me as much as the above 70-200 did.
It does AF really well though, with the same HSM motor. It also doesnt need to turn a lot, I was focusing at different distances from 3m to infinity & the lens was doing it rather fast. Faster than a Nikon 70-300 VR I would say.
If you really need a shallow dof at 300mm where 5.6 just doesnt quite cut it, this lens works well.
I am hoping to get my hands on its older sibling the 100-300mm f2.8 very soon, & I am hoping for good things from it.
