Opinions sought on Sigma F2.8 lenses 24-60; 24-70 or 28-70

[BullcreekBob]

I am also looking for a lens faster and sharper than my Nikkor 18-200 (or the 18-70) that I'll use for streetscapes and I can't afford the Nikon 17-35mm or 17-55mm so I'm considering some Sigma stuff.

The way I see it, the Sigma 24-60mm, 24-70mm and 28-70mm are all similar in price, are all F2.8 and all have reasonable reviews. I am imagining my usage will mainly be in wider part of these ranges. I value personal opinions from people I can blow raspberries at (if required) rather than web site reviews that may well be more an "infomercial" than a real opinion. So does anyone have experience with any of these?

Should the newer 18-50mm F2.8 Sigma a contender as well?

Is the slower Nikon 18-35mm the better way to go.

HELP !!!!!! (please)

[Antsl]

Hi Bob,
I was looking at this same dilemma when I dropped my Sigma 28-70mm 2.8 on the job a while ago. As much as I would love some Nikon glass in that range I opted for the Sigma 24-70 2.8mm.. It is a reasonable lens for the money until I can move onto the Nikon equivalent. The only down side with this lens is that it has a very big filter mount of 82mm for which I don't bother buying filters (from memory the 28-70mm takes 77mm filters).
If you get the chance and you think it is more suitable for the cause then I would have a look at the Sigma 24-60 as a serious option... it has the advantage of being a little sharper (from what I have read in the reviews) but it is also more compact. Given that you already have a lens that covers everything you can afford to have the luxury of this lens.... if I was to have this lens I would have no coverage in the 60 to 80 mm range. It is not a huge issue but it can get annoying if you work the range a bit.
Hope this is a help,
Anthony

[johnd]

Hi Bob,

Not a recomendation as such, but for streetscapes is 24mm wide enough, especially when crop factored up to 36mm? If you're mainly doing people then it would be wide enough, but for buildings I would have thought you needed something quite wide as you're usually very confined for space. I think Sigma have a 10-20 or something, then there is the Tokina 12-24 which is a very sharp lens. I was shooting Hobart buildings on the weekend and was at 14mm most of the time.

Cheers
John

[DJT]

Bob since you already have the range of 18-70 covered & just want a faster sharper lens. Have a look at which end of the range you shoot at. I would lean towards the 18-50 range as you can always crop to get that bit closer if you really have to , but you can't add more into the view on the wider side of the range (if that makes sense)
I currently have a 35 f/2, 50f/1.8, 90f/2.8 & 70-200f/2.8 & old 70-300. As soon as I can afford it I'll be after an 18-50 f/2.8, 35mm just isn't wide enough (not complaining it is a great lens) & also I 'd like to cut back on swapping lenses.

[Big Red]

i have the Sig 28-70/2.8 EX and its ok but only seems to be about the Quality of the Pentax consumer grade lenses ... except its a bit faster.