Advice Requested on Sigma 24-105mm
Perhaps I'm jumping the gun since this lens has been out such a short time in the Nikon mount. Regardless, I'm trying to decide whether to purchase it.
The reviews of the Canon version generally show that it is better (as sharp to much sharper with better corners) than the Canon 24-105mm, which I believe (please humor, I have no proof) is better than the Nikon 24-120mm.
I have the Nikon 24-85 G VR, but I have struggled to like this lens. Its very good at 24mm but not as good as my 18-35mm (which I love) over overlapping FLs. Like most zooms the 24-85 IQ falls off towards the tele end where it is just okay. The reality is that my Tamron 70-300 dominates it at the long end, so I have rarely used the 24-85 G.
To the point, based on reviews and transitivity (humor me), the Sigma 24-105mm is better, and perhaps much better, than the 24-85 and adds 20mm to the equation at the long end to boot. The convenience of not having to change lenses on my D800E is quite alluring. However, I'm wondering whether it's enough better for me to bother. I find that at the wide end I reach for my 18-35mm (did I say how much I love this lens) and at normal to tele I have gone for the Sigma 35mm and the Nikon 85mm 1.4 despite the convenience of the 24-85. So the real question is whether the IQ of the Sigma is good enough that I won't miss these primes for general use.
Of course I'm the only one who can answer this question, so let me try to make my question more concrete. I'm satisfied with the 18-35 over its range and the Tamron is fine from 70-120. So, if the Sigma matches the IQ of those two zooms over it's entire range, I think that it would work for me as a general-purpose walk-around. And, no, I have no interest in purchasing a 24-70mm. I have the Canon version, which is phenomenal for event shooting, but its range is too short for my intended use on the D800E.
So, for anyone who has experience with the Sigma, what do you think?