Nikon 17-35 verses Sigma 15-30

[steve bingham]

I have them both and love them both. However, after 2 days of serious testing I have arrived at the following conclusions - from a sampling of only one lens each. All test shots were on a tripod, shot at 12 meg raw, and converted with EX. All shots were taken at the same time of day, and in sunlight, by simply switching lenses. Focal lengths were matched perfectly by matching area covered. Because of this, 15mm on the Sigma and 35mm on the Nikon could not be compared. However, sharpness of the Sigma at 15mm was outstanding, especially at f11. The sharpness of the Nikon at 35mm was also outstanding, with f8 being the sharpest.

SHARPNESS: This is going to be hard to take for some. At 17mm the Nikon was sharper from f2.8 through f8. However, the Sigma was shaper at f11 and f16 with f22 being a draw. We are talking small differences here. At 30mm the lenses were pretty much identical from f8 to f22, with Nikon again getting the edge from f2.8 to f5.6. Hmmmm. The stories were true! Sigma has one heck of a lens!
COLOR: The Nikon was more natural with better saturation. The Sigma had a strong warm tone (read yellow).
CONTRAST: The Nikon had considerably more contrast.
VIGNETTING: Nikon had less. Enough to see. Sigma was a little hotter in the center.
FLARE: Whoops. The Nikon was far superior. When any sunlight hits the protruding front element of the Sigma, flare becomes ugly! On the other hand, I was able to include the sun with the Nikon with only two visable and small sun flares.
BROKEH: Nikon was smooth and naturel while Sigma was a little stretched.
ASTIGMATISM: Both lenses showed almost none!
DISTORTION: About equal. Amazing. The Sigma favored 17mm while the Nikon slightly favored 30mm.
BUILD: Of course the Nikon wins here. Although physically smaller than the Sigma it weighs more. Probably due to the glass.
PRICE: $560 verses $1,360 roughly.

Recommendations: For the average shooter, the Sigma will probably be an excellent choice (just don't shoot into the sun)! The Nikon, on the other hand, certainly is a pro lens in ALL respects. As it has legendary sharpness it is amazing to see the Sigma do so well. I did make a 24" x 36" print from the Sigma at 15mm at f11. Stunning sharpness. However, the Nikon STAYS on my camera as my first choice! The 15-30 will be used for its extremely sharp 15mm focal length.

Sure hope this helps a few folks. It was a good 16 hours work total. I would love to hear from anyone else that has actually done a side by side CRITICAL comparison. Lenses vary within models.
:)

[Jacques Gratton]

Steve,

Had to return my Sigma 15-30, because it showed unacceptable fuzziness in the corners. My dealer accepted also my excellent Tamron 20-40 as a trade-in, giving me a credit of the same amount I paid in December.
Received the Nikon 17-35 a few days ago, and am delighted with this piece of equipment. I can even use 77mm polarising and Cokin P graduated filters. And the quality of the images is impressive.
Your own experience with the Sigma makes me wonder if I did not get a bad sample.

Jacques

[EWR-COflyer]

These reviews are quite helpful... thank you.

For obvious reasons, I am very interested in the Sigma, but I just cannot get over the fact that I would not be able to use ND Grads or Polarizers... that is a really really serious drawback. So much so that I can't fathom "getting over it."

I do own a Sigma 20mm 1.8 that I love, but unfortunately that will become a 30mm :eek: So, back to the drawing board for ideas... It doesn't have to be a zoom lens, prime is fine, but no rear filters! and that removes just about all of the Sigma lenses from contention for me.

[scooper]

i get dark corners when i use the lens hood that came with my sigma 20mm 1.8.this is my only complait about this lens.seems fishy that the same lens hood that came on the 20mm sigma is the very same shade they put on their 24-70 2.8 also.exactly the same .no wonder i get dark corners when i use it on my 20mm.,

[nikoff]

Hi all,

I'm new in this forum...I'd just puchased a S2 pro.

I had several Nikkor and Sigma lenses ( eg Nikkor 50mm F/1.8 another 70-210 F/4-5.6 and Sigma 24-70 3.3-4.5)

With the digital camera I'll lose my middle wide angle ( 24-70mm wich will be something like "36~105mm" ) So I need to buy a wider zoom...

I was looking for a Sigma 15-30mm when I found a second hand Sigma 17-35mm at an attractive price.



So what's your opinion about these two possibilities...of course if the 15-30 is better I already could wait few months before purchasing it.( Nikon lenses in this range of angle are for me completly out of budget...)