16th November 2004, 12:48 PM
Quick question Nikkor vs Simga
i posted couple of questions before on this forum and thanks to all of you who helped pick a lens.
Well its 105mm macro what i want
i was about to order the Sigma 105mm Ex DG F2.8 for 365$USD
then i found a deal on a nikkor 105mm AF D F2.8 for 400$ mint used
what s best.
16th November 2004, 04:42 PM
Nikon get my vote. Good sharp lens but better check careful for a used one.
16th November 2004, 09:08 PM
if for me to choose, i wld rather take Nikkor. HOWEVER !! if the lens is a totally beat up lens... nt mint. showing lots of signs of usage... dents and scraches and lots of undesirable things on the lens.. paying that much wldnt be worth it...
therefore to cost this little will worth abit to considering about the overall cosmetic of the lens.. therefore... if the lens looks underutilitsed.. den its worth it.. but back to the first thing i said.. if its already in its beaten up state.. u wld rather spend abit more get a newer one or else wait for someone who want to sell his/her lens off.. but remember its a investment to make.. u wldnt want to invest in something which is beaten up rite ??
paying abit more gets u a Solid lens frm Nikkor/Nikon. I wld go for Nikkor/Nikon.
BUT if u are tight on budget.. then go for Sigma lor...
hope these helps u.... always remember.. invest in something which will be with you as long as u wanted it to be, nv invest in something and knowing that it will break down someday.. and before u knew it... its broken... therefore.. invest in something which u think wil deserve ur hard-earned money
17th November 2004, 12:33 AM
You might like to consider the Tamron 90mm Macro... Nicer bokeh compared to the Nikkor 105mm. But the Nikkor is solidly built... had mine for years and still going strong... but contrast on the high side, and the look is a bit harsh.
17th November 2004, 02:35 PM
Agreed... i think Tamron is a better value for money choice.
Originally Posted by Neo