Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus for Nikon

[cyclohexane]

Just wondering if anyone has strong opinions about this lens: Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro DF Autofocus. I know Jon has said he prefers Sigma glass. Also, anyone know if this lens vignettes on 1.5x digital with a 82mm to 77mm step-down ring?

I'm also looking up reviews, but I was wondering what you all thought about this lens as well.

EDIT: Also came across this: the Sigma 24-60mm f/2.8 with a 77mm front. Doesn't seem to be built as well as the 24-70mm.

EDIT 2: I ask everyone, "What are you shooting?" but- naturally- forgot to say it. If you don't know, I'm shooting news: events, portraits, sports, the works. Currently, my bag usually has a 17-35mm f/2.8D AF-S and an 85mm f/1.4D AF in it (70-200mm with/without TC-20E for telephoto); I also have a 50mm f/1.8D AF handy, as well as a 105mm f/1.8 AIS. In the midrange zoom category, I have the 18-70mm DX and 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5D AF. The 24-70mm f/2.8 EX is something I'm considering for the middle when I don't want to carry the 17-35, 85mm, or anything in between- and I only need f/2.8. I don't really want the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8, though I do like the results it produces.

Also, Samy's doesn't carry Sigma products so I can't really go out and try these.

EDIT 3: Yes, I've been searching the forums and reading other posts, in case you're wondering. =)

[badpickev]

let me see if i can address some of these.

24-70 gets higher marks than the 24-60.

ritz carries sigma and usually a good store has a wider selection.

i shoot the tamron 28-75 and am planning on getting the tamron 17-50 for a wider lens. the reason i passed on the sigmas is at 24 its the same as 36mm, still not wide enough. i am still hoping for a review of the tokina 16-50 to see if i should go that way.

my gear is in my sig

[cyclohexane]

Thanks Kev.

Man, I totally forgot about the Tokina 16-50mm f/2.8; I'm waiting for that one too, though I figured that eventually adding a 12-24mm f/4 would take care of the ultrawide bit. Still reluctant to spend money on stuff I can't really use on 24x36mm media though.

[badpickev]

with having the 17-35 you are not pressed for a dx wide lens. so you are open for a lot of the 2.8 lenses. like the tamron 28-105 f2.8, about $700.

i do think the 24-70 will fit you well. tokina used to make a 28-80 f2.8

[cameraguy21773]

Michael -
I think the Sigma 24-70/2.8 EX is an outstanding lens. I replaced the AF-S Nikkor 24-120 VR with it. It should serve you well for a long time. My example was sharp wide open but best stopped down a bit and really amazing at f4.

The EX 24-60/2.8 is better wide open and a bit nicer end to end though it is a little short for some tastes. I think it is Sigma's best mid-range zoom and it goes everywhere with me. The build quality is as good anything in the Sigma line, so no worries there if you're interested. Check it out on FredMiranda.com.

[djKianoosh]

I know I'm resurrecting this thread from the way back machine, but a friend just got this Sigma 24-70f2.8 and so far his sample pics are simply fantastic.

I'm curious if anyone here has done real comparisons between this and the Nikon 24-70f2.8 which is at least twice the price.

What are the real differences between the Sigma and Nikon in terms of the image, color, sharpness, etc.. ? I've been searching around the net but it seems like this obvious comparison hasn't been done or nobody's talking about it...

[badpickev]

wel i know a fuji nikon guy that dropped the 28-70 nikon for the sigma. this was before the nikon version came out. he likes the and doesnt see the need to upgrade.

out side of that, he saiys the fuji is more than acceptable. he shoots weddings with his