Lens advice: Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8 vs Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8-3.5

[qwertzy]

The wise ones always say it's never about the equipment, but I think this is debatable, when it comes to sharpness and consistency. Recently on a trip to Iceland, I thought I managed to capture shots with a 12-24mm f/4 nikkor much sharper than the Sigma (comparing the 17-24mm focal lengths of course), on a D90. So I am thinking of finding a pro-grade lens that is a huge upgrade to the Sigma 17-70mm which I currently own.

I was reading about the Nikon 35-70mm f/2.8, but is this lens really much sharper than the Sigma?
Would I be better off with a 35mm prime?

Feel free to give your opinions on this thread.

 

[pitbull]

no experience on Sigma, but a lot of experience with the 35-70 f/2.8.

if you get a good copy, it is SHARP wide open.

35mm on your DX just no enuf.

it focuses slow but not lacking. i find that it is more than adequate. remember, this is a pro lens of years past.

push pull you may need to get used to, but no problem for me

macro mode can be useful, used it a few times to save the day

very rugged and sturdy, they do not make things like they used to

rotating front can be irritating at times, but i used a CPL on this and never felt any problem with it. you will always want to adjust your CPL everytime you shoot anyway just so that you have the level of control on polarization

this lens kept me from buying the 24-70 f/2.8 for a long time, simple because this thing can perform. and is oso very compact.

but i got a 24-70 for cheap and the sharpest copy ive personally tested ever, so no brainer, i got the best one.

if you have FX, go buy it. if you have DX, spend your money somewhere. i only use this on DX for events shoot where wide is not too much of a consideration.

 

[nightwolf75]

if it is for the d90, u are better off with the sigma. i used to have the 35-70mm. except for the relatively slower AFD motor, it still pretty much kick some serious a55 for a 20(?)+yr old lens.

 

[qwertzy]

if it is for the d90, u are better off with the sigma. i used to have the 35-70mm. except for the relatively slower AFD motor, it still pretty much kick some serious a55 for a 20(?)+yr old lens.

yes, it is for the d90. Can you elaborate why d90 is better paired with the sigma rather than this 35-70? Thanks.

 

[Benji77]

Nightwolf75 is saying that the Sigma has the advantage of focal range.

I have owned the 35-70, and it is excellent for value and quality. It is sharp and contrasty even wide open. It's colours are rich and accurate. If you shoot FX and don't need a wider lens, this is a great buy.

 

[spree86]

yes, it is for the d90. Can you elaborate why d90 is better paired with the sigma rather than this 35-70? Thanks.

This is because 35mm is rather tight on a cropped camera. It's a flexible range on an FF body but rather limiting for a crop.

I am using this lens on my D7000, I can say that it's sharp and the focusing is more consistent than my previous Tamron 28-75, however it has less contrast than the other lenses I own (can be easily edited during PP) I don't mind the range as I mainly use it for portrait shoots.

 

[nightwolf75]

yes, it is for the d90. Can you elaborate why d90 is better paired with the sigma rather than this 35-70? Thanks.

1.5 crop factor on the d90 makes it roughly a 45mm at the wide end. dats why the sigma might be a better fit.

 

[xtemujin]

If you want after sales service, get the Nikon.

Nikon repair warranty 3 months.

Sigma repair warranty 1 month.