Lens

[Macnab18]

I am thinking qf purchasing a Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 which costs over £1000 but the same lens from Sigma costs just over £400 why is there such a big difference in price is there much difference in the glass used
macnab18

[greenwing]

Sigma currently list 2 24-70 f/2.8 lenses, 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM and 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO. The 2nd of these is about £430, and I guess that's the one you were looking at. The first is £730 and is probably more comparable to the Nikkor. The two Sigmas have different optical formulas, so will perform differently.

I think it's about normal for a Nikkor to be 50% more expensive than a 3rd party lens. It's not always very much better, though.

Hope this helps
Chris

[Macnab18]

Hi Chris
Yes it was the second I had been looking at and maybe the first would be better thanks for your comments found helpful
Dave

[OldBoy]

Can't comment on the Sigma but the Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 is a cracking len and worth the money if you want weather sealed and top class optics in a pro lens. I love mine and use it quite often.

[GaryCatterick]

Originally Posted by OldBoy

Can't comment on the Sigma but the Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 is a cracking len and worth the money if you want weather sealed and top class optics in a pro lens. I love mine and use it quite often.

Seconded. The Nikon is the best of the bunch.

Regards

[xavier]

I would like to echo what Oldboy wrote Nikon aresuper (even tough i never used a Sigma lense). The unfortunate fact is if you want Quality you have to pay for it