Nikon 14-24 vs Sigma Art 14-24 (Page 2): I agree; my new Sigma 100-400 blew away both versions (old & new) of the my formerly owned (and very $$$) Nikon 80-400's.

JFleming Loc: Belchertown, Ma

Blurryeyed wrote:

Sigma Art Lenses are very good, I think that I would definitely do a little research, you may find it will outperform the Nikon. I think that it is too soon to find reviews on this lens however. Sigma is turning the OEM manufacturers on their heads with their new lens lineup, their new lines often outperform both Canon and Nikon.

I agree; my new Sigma 100-400 blew away both versions (old & new) of the my formerly owned (and very $$$) Nikon 80-400's.

dnathan

I had a Sigma 17-70 for about 500 clicks. It came apart in my hand while focusing. Sent it to Sigma. They offered me a $10 discount on their new. 16-70. I told them where they could stick the lens while I decided. I should have known better. Only Nikon & Leica now.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

Robertl594 wrote:

I need to repair my Nikon 14-24 2.8 Lens. I also see that Sigma has announced their new lense at $1,299. Aside from price, does anyone have any experience with the Sigma? Art are typically good lenses but I am Nikon guy and wonder if I should venture to Sigma Art.

You don't say what is wrong with the lens. If you are not sure, perhaps it would be worth it to send to Nikon and have them diagnose the problem. Have you spoken to Nikon to see what the repair would cost [estimate]? Once you have that information, it will be easier to decide whether to repair or replace.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

JFleming wrote:

I agree; my new Sigma 100-400 blew away both versions (old & new) of the my formerly owned (and very $$$) Nikon 80-400's.

First of all, that particular Sigma is an old design, nowhere near the quality of their ART line. Secondly, I would seriously doubt your statement. I would consider none of those slow lenses very good, but the Sigma better than the Nikon version, especially the newest version - no way! Best of luck.

JFleming Loc: Belchertown, Ma

cjc2 wrote:

First of all, that particular Sigma is an old design, nowhere near the quality of their ART line. Secondly, I would seriously doubt your statement. I would consider none of those slow lenses very good, but the Sigma better than the Nikon version, especially the newest version - no way! Best of luck.

Sorry to disappoint you but the Sigma 100-400 I reference, is the NEW design that just came out NOT the old design that you mention..... I think I'm more than qualified to offer my opinion/observation on Nikon gear that I've owned and used extensively out in the field! I've been shooting with Nikon since the early 80's so I've seen the good, bad and ugly of what Nikon has offered us.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

A new Sigma 14-24mm Art Lens will cost you $1300. Find out what it will cost your Nikon to be repaired. The Nikon is no slouch. Remember that. Especially the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

JFleming wrote:

Sorry to disappoint you but the Sigma 100-400 I reference, is the NEW design that just came out NOT the old design that you mention..... I think I'm more than qualified to offer my opinion/observation on Nikon gear that I've owned and used extensively out in the field! I've been shooting with Nikon since the early 80's so I've seen the good, bad and ugly of what Nikon has offered us.

You are correct as I missed the word "Contempory". Big difference in price between the Sigma and Nikon and I'be shocked if one didn't get something of value for that difference. I've only been shooting with Nikon since the F5, but I consider myself well versed in the Nikon system as I shoot upwards of 100,000 shots per year, mostly sports action. I am most certainly NOT the world's leading Nikon expert. I would not use either lens in my work as neither is fast enough for what I am called on to produce. When I go to grab a 400, it's a 400/2.8E FL VR. I am also a Sigma owner of three of their newer ART lenses, a 50, 135 and 24-105, all of which I consider superior. I have owned, and recently sold a Sigma 150-600 Sport in favor of a Nikon 105/1.4E, which I find so much more useful for sports. I believe my extensive experience allows me to have an opinion, but it is just that -- an opinion. Opinions are worth what you pay for them. Best of luck.