|
![]() |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3
|
![]()
Hello,
I am searching for a lens for the Nikon D50, firstly my eye felt on the Sigma 28-105/2.8-4, but now I have the possibility the get the Nikon 28-105/3.5-4.5 for the same price. I want to use it for making photos on concerts, so a low diafragma would be nice. Is the difference of 0.7-0.5 in diafragma much? Or should I take the Nikon because it's better? Thanks in advance! |
![]() |
![]() |
Sponsored Links |
|
![]() |
#2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
|
![]()
Having a max aperature of 2.8 is good, but remeber, that aperature is not constant throughout the whole zoom range. Before you even hit the middle of the zoom range, you'll be caught up to what the Nikon has in terms of aperature.
If you can live without zoom, look at the 50mm f 1.8. It's great in lowlight, and with the digital crop is a moderate telephoto (75mm after crop factor). You'll never find a zoom at that range that has that has a max aperature of f/1.8. The price is also right at under $100 USD, used. To get a zoom with a constant aperature, you're looking at the 24-85mm f/2.8 which is signficantly more expensive. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3
|
![]()
Thanks for your reply. I already ordered the 50 mm, but I also want a lens with zoom, so my eye felt on the Sigma or the Nikon. I have to make a choice between one of those 2, so I want to what lens is better, especially for concerts.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,599
|
![]()
What about the Sigma 24-70 EX? This lens has a constant f/2.8 and is well regarded:
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...7_3128crx.aspx http://www.pbase.com/fstopjojo/247028135 |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3
|
![]()
That one is to expensive for me. I can get that Nikon lens for the same price as the Sigma, that is why the Nikon is an option.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
|
![]()
Neither is highly regarded lens (doesn't mean they are bad) and I don't know that you'll find the extra 1/2 stop the Sigma provides (especially since it is available for less than half the zoom range) all that helpful. I don't think you'll find that one is any better than the other, except for build quality, in which the Nikkor has the slight edge.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|