FX 24-120 f/4 vs DX Sigma 17-50 f/2.8

Started 2 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
tpag2000
Forum MemberPosts: 51
Like?
FX 24-120 f/4 vs DX Sigma 17-50 f/2.8
2 months ago

I'm curious if anyone has seen/done any direct comparison between the 24-120 f/4 on FX and the Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS on DX.  I know it's not entirely apples-to-apples here, but I'm curious about the image quality differences.  I have the Sigma and have been on DX for many years and have recently been thinking more seriously about moving to FX.  I like the idea of a bit more reach than the Sigma (I end up at 50mm a lot).  Based on an initial look at the reviews it seems like the Nikon 24-120 could be a pretty good compromise offering a bit more reach, same DOF/light equivalence, and pretty similar image quality.  If anyone has experience with both that can comment or provide comparable samples, that would be awesome.

Since it is often asked, I'll answer up front.  I shoot as a hobby only with no delusions of ever going professional.  I probably don't "need" FX but seeing as my entire goal is to have fun (it is a hobby after all) I figure anything that accomplishes that goal is fair game.  I do have the Nikon 50mm f/1.4D prime and I love shooting with that lens on my D7000 (and my D80 before that).  I'm sure I'd be getting the 85mm f/1.8G prime if I make the move the FX (maybe even before), not sure about a wide angle prime, but who knows.  I had been looking at either the D610 or a used D800 for making to move the FX.  With the rumors about a new FX and the fact that I'm in no particular hurry to upgrade I'll at least wait to see how that plays out first.

Thanks.

ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow