Comparison of two lenses: I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about...

reindeer Loc: London U.K.

I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about the same. My camera Nikon D610. My interests street photography, landscapes, beautiful buildings. I suppose it's "Reach" versus Image Quality.
I will be grateful for the thoughts of my fellow Hoggs.
Thank you.

tradio Loc: Oxford, Ohio

I would go with the ART lens for the IQ.

traveler90712 Loc: Lake Worth, Fl.

I'd go with the 28-300 for the versatility.

Longshadow Loc: Audubon, PA, United States

traveler90712 wrote:

I'd go with the 28-300 for the versatility.

:thumbup:

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Why not take both? :?:

Jbat Loc: Charleston, SC

The 28-300 is my most used lens. Great al around lens. Works really well for travel.

Jbat Loc: Charleston, SC

The 28-300 is my most used lens. Great al around lens. Works really well for travel.

MtnMan Loc: ID

reindeer wrote:

I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about the same. My camera Nikon D610. My interests street photography, landscapes, beautiful buildings. I suppose it's "Reach" versus Image Quality.
I will be grateful for the thoughts of my fellow Hoggs.
Thank you.

You might start by comparing them on DXOMark.

Many like the Nikon 28-300 because of its versatility. If you are only bringing one lens with you it is the one to have. But its image quality on DXOMark is modest. I expect that the Sigma blows it away on image quality. I know my new Sigma 17-50 blows away the 28-300 in image quality on my D5300. DXOMark ranks the 28-300 much better on my D800, which I use it on, than on my D5300. You need to be sure to check the lens data on your camera because it varies a lot based on camera.

Only you can decide which criteria matters most to you.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

reindeer wrote:

I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about the same. My camera Nikon D610. My interests street photography, landscapes, beautiful buildings. I suppose it's "Reach" versus Image Quality.
I will be grateful for the thoughts of my fellow Hoggs.
Thank you.

Try renting each, if possible. Then you can decide for yourself. Quality beats reach if you are serious about the image. What good is reach if the image is not of top quality? That is actually an opinion, I share it with several others. :lol: :lol:

dsmeltz Loc: Philadelphia

I don't hink you need as much reach as you think for your stated uses. Also "beautiful buildings" has me think the difference between 24 and 28 is more important than that between 105 and 300 for your uses.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Personally, I'm not fond of the super zooms. While they are great all-in-one lenses, you give up quality for that big zoom range. The Nikon 24-120/4 would be a good choice which is a little more expensive than the Sigma, which is out-of-stock. Other than that, my bet would be that ANY Sigma ART series lens would be great and I would not hesitate to buy one based upon my experience with my Sigma Sport 150-600. It is also a bit less expensive, with a bit less reach. If it is available before you need to have it, I would give it a try. Just my personal opinion.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

reindeer wrote:

I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about the same. My camera Nikon D610. My interests street photography, landscapes, beautiful buildings. I suppose it's "Reach" versus Image Quality.
I will be grateful for the thoughts of my fellow Hoggs.
Thank you.

Here are some good links. Knock yourself out. :D

http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/lenses
http://lenshero.com/lens-comparison
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx
http://www.lenstip.com/lenses.html

reindeer Loc: London U.K.

Thanks a lot everyone for your most useful suggestions. These have helped clear the fog I was in.
Most grateful.
I am now of the view that a Nikkor 24-120 F/4 might be a good compromise.

CHOLLY Loc: THE FLORIDA PANHANDLE!

Take both.

Remember; it's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not HAVE it. ;)

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

reindeer wrote:

I like to travel frequently and am undecided between a Nikon 28-300 mm f/3.5-5.6 and a Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art lens. Weight and dimensions of both lenses about the same. My camera Nikon D610. My interests street photography, landscapes, beautiful buildings. I suppose it's "Reach" versus Image Quality.
I will be grateful for the thoughts of my fellow Hoggs.
Thank you.

I have sold my 70-200 f/4 and 24-70 f/2.8 and am using the 28-300 in their place on my D800E. The former are rated better but difference in IQ does not make up for the versatility.

I finally come to the realization that the ratings are a numbers game on paper. They mean far less that many people think, although I don't dismiss them entirely.

I don't like changing lenses or lugging equipment around. Besides, I can correct for most of its deficiencies in post processing.