Sigma 24-35mm F2

spraynpray

spraynpray not sure about the Buick 225 could you mean the Buick Electra 225. I maybe wrong.

My Memory failed me. If it was an English car I would have got it right but it was the first time I ever saw one so I did quite well to get it so near right! It was an impressive old car all right.

Thanks for the correction!

Parke1953

You did good they were really cool cars. Big engine and lots of power. Well back on topic. I hink I might like this lens. We will have to wait.

Msmoto

In some areas, it was called a "deuce and a quarter".....FYI

Topic?

I am thinking this new lens could be very nice as I usually like a bit more DOF than wide open and when shooting a scene like a did last night, yup, the little zoom could have been used.

donaldejose

I too think it would be nice to have 24, 38 and 35mm at f2 all in one lens if it is not too large. On a wide angle lens f2 should be fast enough, especially since the newer bodies have such good IQ at ISO 200 through 800. However, it will have to be very sharp to replace the Sigma Art or Nikon primes.

Parke1953

Msmoto your right on the money.

snakebunk

Good review:
http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1804

I think this lense will be mine (in ten years or so after I have bought the new Nikon 600/4).

JonMcGuffin

I think everything is going to boil down on this lens to how well it performs in not only sharpness but Loca, vignetting, etc. If it's a stellar performer (50mm 1.4 Art - 18-35mm 1.8) than it's going to find it's way into a lot of people's bags I think. It's a pretty good price and would cover a couple of primes in that range.

Zooms are great, I love my primes but the argument of moving forward or backwards is simply not an option when you are capturing "moments" and in many disciplines of photography, moments are in fact precisely what you're after. A zoom happens in a fraction of a second and gives you a completely different composition. All things being equal, a zoom is a far better tool than a prime. It's just that they're heavy, don't usually perform as well, and cost much more (on average). So it's back to the plus/negative thing again...

Ironheart

Main blog says this will be $999. Worth it? Anyone seen pics yet?

PB_PM

The value of the lens depends on who is using it, and whether or not it meets their needs. That is only something the person purchasing the lens can decide. Other than Sigma's samples I haven't seen anything out there. Is it even shipping yet?

sevencrossing

The value of the lens depends on who is using it, and whether or not it meets their needs. That is only something the person purchasing the lens can decide.

+1

For a lot of people I think the AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR would be more useful

for me 24mm is not wide enough

snakebunk

Main blog says this will be $999. Worth it? Anyone seen pics yet?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/97470426@N06/sets/72157655429695588

heartyfisher

I think the best use for such a lense would be for evening street photography ..

NSXTypeR

Large filters aside, $1000 for this lens is reasonable in my opinion. Like others have said though, the Nikkor 16-35 seems like a better range, for a little bit more.

Depends on your needs I guess.