JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).
By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you accept the use of cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.
Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!
There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 169000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
Cons:AF problematic at low temperatures. Very small focusing ring.
Opinion:I recently bought this Sigma and I immediately took it with me to Siberia in December. I do not dwell on the qualities that are already widely treated. Robust and sharp lens. To my great perplexity the autofocus was blocked at temperatures around-20, while at home it worked. I thought it was faulty, then I figured it might be the cold and I wrapped the lens in a sleeve of an old woollen sweater. In doing so I had no more problems. I think it's a viable alternative to the Canon.
Cons:A little bit the weight and problems of electronic compatibility with all Nikon
Opinion:The merits of this lens are indisputable, from the image quality to the focus speed, the stabilizer works very well. But the Nikon machines do not digest very well at the level of communication between the machine and lens, so that the problems I found on d750 on the D800 d300 d5100 d7000 and others with which I tried are the same: excessive battery consumption, does not work time to Auto Standby, do not work on programmed interval photos, it will not turn off the image after a while it tripped, and on the shutter data writes stabilizer always active even if it shuts down. (Cmq the stabilizer does not come into operation if you turn off the switch) the tests were done with different objectives 24-105 and all have encountered the same problems. Even after upgrading machines and lens. In my opinion the problems are due to the fact that the optics is always active and consequently keeps the machine active. With Nikon Optics problems 0. Cmq If you choose it at the photographic level is great.
Opinion:Bought to replace a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 I series which had broken the filter ring-I thought I would buy this lens giving up the opening of the Tammy (being fond of street and landscapes I used the aperture to f/2.8 very sporadically). To the touch from a feeling of extreme solidity. It does not have a release lever but is well-solid and the lens does not flow unless applying a certain pressure. Tested at an event in my area and with a micrometric ruler does not have front/back focus problems. The weight feels. The focal range from 24 to 105 mm makes it a real handyman for travel. The trumpet is 82mm, so recycle all of the Tammy's filters. The stabilizer is silent and effective. Of a hundred photos taken does not seem to me wrong even a focus. Vignetting and chromatic aberration are not noteworthy and in any case perfectly corregible. Nice Bokeh. Faults-the hood folded backwards does not allow zooming, similar to the 70-200 that I already own; The focus ring is on the side of the camera body, zooming from the side of the lens... you get used to it but at the beginning it's "molesta" paid roughly €800, overall an excellent lens and the unbeatable value for money.
Opinion:Very good optics in all respects (rating 9): Used on the Nikon D800, already at F4 shows excellent sharpness throughout the frame and a nice contrast, the stabilization is always very effective and the focus very fast. My copy, bought second hand, on my machine body did not need any calibration of the autofocus, however has a slight tendency to overexpose: about 1/3 diaphragm, but nothing that can not be corrected in pp. I took it to replace a Nikon 24-120 f4 much exploited (well beyond the 100,000 shots) that because of some excessive mistreat I was no longer convincing me as sharpness; The fact is that the difference I saw immediately compared to the last images of 24-120, while, is not so marked compared to the photos taken years earlier with Nikon. To the question: "Nikon or Sigma?" Honestly, I could not give a preference, the Sigma seems a little sharper at full aperture, and also has a nice blur, but it is very big, heavy, and stops at 105, the Nikon is nearby for sharpness, stabilization seems to me Equivalent (maybe a hair better than the sigma), the autofocus is just slower than the Sigma, but it's lighter, less cumbersome and gets to 120 (it's little, but it's handy). As for the Nikon, even for the Sigma I can not talk about the distortion because I do not care, while chromatic aberrations are irrelevant on the practical level, and the whole is safely correctable in PP with the right SW (I use DxO). They are all minimal differences that on lenses from reportage like these (excellent for the purpose), in the end are lost in the inaccuracies of recovery that in fact pave strengths and weaknesses. These consumer optics do not have production processes with a quality that is worthy of a Leica optics, so the defect always ' looms ', perhaps justified by the magnitude of the tolerances on the specifications. The key to everything is in the good fortune to find the right specimen (fundamental: Try it well before you buy it). So the most concrete thing I'm going to write is: good luck.
Pros:Build quality, aesthetics, F4 at all focal lengths, stabilizer, sharpness
Cons:Usual problems F/b Focus Sigma, distortion and vignetting more or less at all focal
Opinion:Taken to accompany me around like handyman. Immediately discovered the usual problems of F/b focus unresolved in the room but only after purchasing the USB dock separately. A hassle but I had previously put into account. Apart from that the lens is very solid and built very well, a real tank. I also like it very aesthetically and for the weight, which is true that it makes you feel, but that from a feeling of professional optics. Maybe a little hard scrolling the zoom, I hope because new. Some time ago I had the Nikkor 24-120 VR that I do not regret. I never really liked it. This has the sharpness and definition I was looking for, though rather concentrated in the central area. Vote 10 for the stabilizer, really remarkable! One of the most effective stabilizers that ever happened to me. What I do not like is the obvious barrel distortion at 24, 35mm and bearing after, up to 105. In short it is, in one way or another always quite obvious. As on the other hand the vignetting, but in my opinion, is less annoying than in 24-120. In any case a solid, fast and reliable lens I'm very happy with. Very recommended!
The sample photos are selected automatically between all photos posted by JuzaPhoto members, using the camera and the lens selected in the techs. If you find evident errors (e.g. photos taken with cameras and lenses that are not available yet), you can contribute to improve the page by sending a private message to the user that has entered incorrect values in the photo caption.
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.
![[editors pick]](shared_files/layout/ep_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
![[retina]](shared_files/layout/retina_badge.jpg){kind=icon}
