I have a question regarding the DG series of lenses, I'm

File: 1374089285365.png (5KB, 302x237px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 302x237px

use the gear thread you retard

>>2988870
Obviously I'm new, retard.

>>2988871
read the sticky use the gear thread delete this thread next time

on crop it'll be around a 30mm lens. It'll be just as sharp and let in just as much light

>>2988872
Thank you,

File: Sigma-20mm-f1.4-DG-HSM-Art-lens-MTF-chart.png (11KB, 691x295px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 691x295px

fullframe lenses have sharper corners on crop.
Look at the MTF chart for any given lens and it will show a degradation of LPM contrast towards the corner of the frame (the outer edge of the round lens). Crop sensors generally omit that downturn in the curve almost entirely.
So in fact you get a 'better' image (more uniform sharpness and resolving clarity), especially when shooting wide open.
The only real downside to crop is when shooting ultrawide you get less of the 'wide' aspect.

>>2988866
just get the 18-35 1.8

>>2988976
Even better, the Tamron 15-35. Smaller and sharper too.

>>2989016
Because it's a stop and a half slower you klutz.

But no, don't get either, crop lenses are a false economy.

OP the d7000 will do fine for now, if you feel you need extra sharpness or bokeh, then consider the full frame upgrade. (desu, I'm half tempted to say go ff now because it feels so good and the larger viewfinder is a million times better)

>>2989016
There is a 15-35 lens?

I'm only aware of the 15-30, which while good, is both heavier and more expensive than the Sigma 18=35.

>>2989054
heavier and more expensive and slower and probably not sharper at the same opening

>>2989054
You are right, it is the 15-30

>>2989021
These are FF lenses, at least the Tammy is.

>>2989169
>probably
You are probably a cum guzzling faggot but at least I am closer to the truth than you are.