I recently bought the Sigma 18-125 DC lens for my Nikon D100. I know - why didn't I buy the Nikon 17-70 lens for the dSLR series?
Reasons: 1 I like the longer zoom, meaning I won't have to change lenses very often if ever 2 I've always found Sigma lenses to perform extremely well 3 it was also cheaper (though this wasn't a major consideration
I can't do a side-by-side comparison, no doubt the Nikon will perform better in certain regards, e.g. ultimate resolution, less distortion, less vignetting.
But I took loads of photos on it during my summer holidays in Yorkshire and I've been completely satisfied with its performance, with enlargements up to 8"*11.5". I haven't looked yet at 11"*16 prints.
So as I'm not a pro, I'm not going to lose any sleep over not having the Nikon.
(You can see some of them at http://www.howardleigh.me.uk)
Incidentally I have used an Nikon 28-80 on the D100 and that performed fine too.
So I'd be even more interested in digestible facts such as sensible examples of how DC and non-DC and different marques of lenses compare in rel life and not just on someone's drawing board!
Howard
