|
Re: I would have paid double for the nikkor 28g
In reply to Manny82,
5 months ago
|
Manny82 wrote:
Secondly, compare the initial purchase price of the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 to Nikon's 35mm f/1.4 - value for money the Sigma gives you lots more - so your argument is void. DPReview say it's the best of all the 35mm lenses - and it only costs a little more than the Nikon 28g.
3rd party lenses are always better "bargains", if you don't plant to sell them I guess (I dobut anyone keeps a sigma for 20years). But they still don't look like nikkors, and that's why I shoot nikon, I like the nikkor look both newer and older.
--
d800e, 16-35vr, 24 pce, 28g, 50/1.4d, 85/1.4g, zeiss 21
gitzo 5531s, RRS bh55,
sb910, 3 sb900s, 3 sb800s, 6 vintage vivitar 285hv, 3 PW flexttl, PW minittl, PW AC3
nikon j1, 18.5/1.8
sony RX100
"always just one light modifier away from greatness"
| Post (hide subjects) | Posted by | When | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago | |||
| 5 months ago |
   |
|
Connect with dpreview
|
