![]() ![]() It focuses fine for landscapes (which 95% of what I make). ![]() It is sharp and easy to use (the switches are all in good places and the focus and zoom rings are nicely attenuated). I can't say enough good things about mine. Tamron's are OK and Tokina's are best of the off-brand - but, both are inferior to Nikon.Ģ. The rear is a PITA - it is so very fiddly to line it up! The Nikon teleconverters are the same way about having to line up the notch perfectly (but, at least there there is a reason). The front cap isn't center pinch (so you can't put it on and off with a lens hood (or Lee filter holder) attached. I have thrown out the Sigma caps - I just hate Sigma front and rear caps. I have the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 macro and the genuine Nikon rear cap fits perfectly fine. I buy Nikon front and rear caps for all my non-Nikon lenses. VR version hence I was able to get a Nikon.ġ. Given that in the futureĥyear the D3 or D700 may be a lot more affordable on the used market, I was thinking if the 17-50/2.8 TamronĬould be a good lens for my D70, at the moment I don't have a mid zoom lens other than the NIkon 18-200vr.Īt the telephoto side of things, I was fortunately to get the AFD 80-200/2.8 which was much cheaper than the AFS I like the Sigma 10-20mm very much, probably would get the Tamron 90mm Macro as well. I mean do you read up on it and if its good you buy it or do you sort only buy Nikon lenses and think little Out of interest for these non Nikon lenses. Is that a good alternative to the Nikon 17-55? The other thing is that a numbef of my photography club, many Nikon and Canon users like and own the Tamronġ7-50mm f/2.8 lens its a DX format lens. Rear caps don't fit and with the Sigma caps you need to match the red dot when attaching the rear lens cap. Hi, I have the Sigma 10-20mm, I find the rear lens cap a hassle because when you have Nikon lenses, the Nikon ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |