Sigma Lenses: I see quite a number of you use Sigma lenses, I've never ventured into aftermarket lenes, always used Nikon. That aside, are Sigma lenses close to Nikon lenses in quality...

Past Pro Loc: Spring Hill, Florida

I see quite a number of you use Sigma lenses, I've never ventured into aftermarket lenes, always used Nikon. That aside, are Sigma lenses close to Nikon lenses in quality of build and image quality? I know there is a cost savings, I suppose that may be the main reason people go to the aftermarkets.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Past Pro wrote:

I see quite a number of you use Sigma lenses, I've never ventured into aftermarket lenes, always used Nikon. That aside, are Sigma lenses close to Nikon lenses in quality of build and image quality? I know there is a cost savings, I suppose that may be the main reason people go to the aftermarkets.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

I think there is no comparison between Nikon and Canon lenses and the third-party lenses like Sigma, Tamron, etc.

marquis1955 Loc: Lometa, TX

Many folks have their preferences for glass and I like most folks like to have good glass on my DSLR. I use a few of the newer Sigma lenses and I absolutely love the performance of my 18-250 and my 150-500. I also have glass made by my camera manufacturer. I will say that the Sigma glass I am presently using I would not replace for the price difference and will put the images at least up against any other zooms.

Izza1967 Loc: Bristol, England

I wanted an ultra wide lens for my 7D and after a lot of research I opted for the Sigma EX 10-20mm f/4-5.6.

Build quality is excellent as is the images it produces.

The fact that it is also £150 is a big bonus as I also bought a polarizing and still paid a lot less than the Canon lens .

Here is a thread I posted recently with my latest image captured using my Sigma lens

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

Sigma's top of the line lenses, the EX series, are very, very good. I can't see much image quality difference between the ones I have and Nikon. They also recently came out with an "Art" series of primes that are supposed to be great, though I have not investigated them.
They do make a more budget oriented line which I have no experience with.
I had one back in the '70's that was so bad, it actually fell apart. They have massively improved their quality.

Sheila Loc: Arizona or New York

The comparison depends on the particular lens and how new it is. I have mostly Nikon lenses but a couple of Sigma and one Tokina.
For example, I have a Nikon 18-200 lens. When I had a hiking accident and had to send the lens for repair, I bought a Sigma 18-250 lens. Eventually, I went back to the Nikon lens because I though my photos had better contrast and were a little sharper at the exposures I was using with the Nikon lens.

About a year ago, Sigma released a new concept for lenses it produced. In addition, they have released a number of new lenses that have received excellent reviews. Many people on this forum have certain Sigma lenses that work very well for them. They have made excellent comments about the 150-500 mm Sigma lens for nature and wildlife shots.

Bozsik Loc: Orangevale, California

I have the 10-20 also. It is a very good lens. I don't use it as much now that I have the Nikon 16-35 though. You are not going to notice the difference if you shoot the images with the newer Sigmas compared to Cannon or Nikon.

marquis1955 Loc: Lometa, TX

Sheila I don't know which 18-250 lens you used but Sigma came out with a new 18-250 lens this year that take Awesome images.

Sheila Loc: Arizona or New York

It is the older version from 3 or 4 years ago.

JR1 Loc: Tavistock, Devon, UK

russelray wrote:

I think there is no comparison between Nikon and Canon lenses and the third-party lenses like Sigma, Tamron, etc.

Which sigma/tamron lenses have you used and made comparisons with, I do have and have used many Canon/Nikon lenses and Sigma

JPL

Past Pro wrote:

I see quite a number of you use Sigma lenses, I've never ventured into aftermarket lenes, always used Nikon. That aside, are Sigma lenses close to Nikon lenses in quality of build and image quality? I know there is a cost savings, I suppose that may be the main reason people go to the aftermarkets.

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Sigma does not make aftermarket lenses, just brand new Sigma design lenses. They have a lens category called "art lenses" Those lenses are very good, as good or even better than similar Nikon lenses. You can check it out on Dxomark.com They test lenses and you can search the results to see which lenses are good and which are not.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Oh, my. Now that I undestand Nikonese I'll have to go back to school to learn what APO DG OS HSM means in Sigmanese. :( :roll:

Izza1967 Loc: Bristol, England

OddJobber wrote:

Oh, my. Now that I undestand Nikonese I'll have to go back to school to learn what APO DG OS HSM means in Sigmanese. :( :roll:

I have a DC on my Sigma lens so add that to your list too :D

AntonioReyna Loc: Los Angeles, California

I have shot Nikon and Canon DSLRS and mostly stuck to their lenses. But I had a Sigma 12-24 lens which was fabulous. Built like a tank and very nice images. Their quality has improved overall and they now have some very highly rated lenses. In the past, I had a Tokina 19-35 that I used with my first Nikon D100 and it was a very good lens also. So, decide what you want and then see what is available.

Nate Loc: Ann Arbor, Mi.

Sigma EX lens are worthy of consideration. Read cross comparison reviews, rent one.