12-29-2015, 07:53 PM
That's one of the most off conclusions I've seen so far, congratulations :angry: I agree with "not being spectacular", but talking about Sigma hasn't made a good standard zoom is steep. What about the much more costly Nikon 24-70 I with all it's weaknesses?
At roughly 20% less the price of the Nikkor 24-120, the Sigma simply DON'T HAS TO BE better - even if it's "only equally", it's a bargain! I doubt yelling will help but I have to because I'm upset and you just don't mention:
VR/OS, which is at least a full stop, if not more, better than the Nikon 24-120! I know this is hard to verify in one test to be comparable, but just get a Nikkor and compare the Sigma down to 1/15. You're talking in both tests giving the Nikon 4 stops improvement and the Sigma 3 - I bet it's the other way round. Even the newer Nikkors don't perform like Sigma's OS
This lens leaves nothing to gain for the Nikon and if I take a rubber band with me, I have the weather seal as good as the bloody rubber gasket every PZ tester apparently needs to mention. This lens was short in supply, makes me wonder why? Obviously other people made the decision and saved some money by still getting the better value.
At roughly 20% less the price of the Nikkor 24-120, the Sigma simply DON'T HAS TO BE better - even if it's "only equally", it's a bargain! I doubt yelling will help but I have to because I'm upset and you just don't mention:
- what are these fantastic weather sealings of Nikon worth, this tiny rubber gasket? Please, Markus or anybody else, show me the Nikon warranty text clearly allow you to use the lens in rain or snow or ice temperatures. Otherwise, I would highly appreciate to never read again this senseless phrase of "not being weather sealed".
- The Nikon you can AF microadjust, if you're body behind the lens allows. But only for one focal length and for one distance. Good luck! The Sigma is just delivering sharpness after adjustments. Don't tell me a lens should be alright out of the box - that's coincidence, nothing else.
- One of the downsides of the Sigma is M82 filter size.
- Edit: And the extra weight, too.
VR/OS, which is at least a full stop, if not more, better than the Nikon 24-120! I know this is hard to verify in one test to be comparable, but just get a Nikkor and compare the Sigma down to 1/15. You're talking in both tests giving the Nikon 4 stops improvement and the Sigma 3 - I bet it's the other way round. Even the newer Nikkors don't perform like Sigma's OS
This lens leaves nothing to gain for the Nikon and if I take a rubber band with me, I have the weather seal as good as the bloody rubber gasket every PZ tester apparently needs to mention. This lens was short in supply, makes me wonder why? Obviously other people made the decision and saved some money by still getting the better value.