Sigma 24-60 f/2.8 EX DG conclusions?
I realize that the Sigma 24-60 2.8 EX DG has been talked about in these forums, but searching and reading the results leaves me still wondering whether there is any conclusion about it.
Basically, I'm confused by people's reports and the available test results. People's experiences in this forum seem to be decidely mixed. Reviews on other sites like Fred Miranda suggest it's actually a very good lens, but Photozone.de doesn't even have it tested. It looks promising (f/2.8, 9 blade aperture, 77mm filters), but Sigma's own MTF charts aren't spectacular. (For example, they're not as good as the Sigma 17-70's.) It seems it should be a popular lens, but it's not getting rave reports like the Tamron 28-75. Some people say it's sharper than X (fill in the blank), but other say it's softer than Y.
Can anyone summarize (1) how good is the optical quality relative to other lenses in the range (other than primes or the Nikon 28-70 -- it's clearly the standard-setter, and I know nothing will really compare) and (2) how does it compare to the Tamron 28-75, Nikon 18-70 or other lenses in this range?
My biases: I have a sharp, outstanding copy of a Nikon 18-70, and the 35/2, 50/1.4 and 85/1.8, but lust for a 2.8 mid-range zoom for available-light shooting. Fast focus isn't critical (but accurate focus is!). Bokeh, contrast and color are more important to me than ultimate sharpness because of the print and digital image sizes that I end up using; however, good sharpness is still important. The 10mm difference between 60 and 70 are inconsequential as far as I'm concerned.
I'm sorry to bring this up, but if I could make a clear conclusion from past discussions about the 24-60, I really wouldn't waste people's time. Maybe I missed a good thread somewhere that answered all the questions about this lens...
|Patrick Finds Inner Peace by ecastellon|
from Your best photo of the week!
|Forks by Kukla|
from Arranged everyday objects