On 26/11/2014 11:05 a.m., Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Me says...
the practical
difficulty on shooting outdoors without the sun in the frame.

What's wrong in having the sun in the frame?

Nothing wrong with it, but flare and ghosting can be a problem. Some
lenses perform better than others. The large bulbous exposed front
element on lenses like the Sigma 8-16 or Nikkor 14-24 can be a problem
if the sun isn't in the frame - but hits the front element.

As a Dx and FX user, IMO FX has a massive advantage over DX at these
focal lengths. The Nikkor 18-35 G is less expensive than the Nikkor DX
12-24, it weighs about the same, covers approx the same field of view,
but is much, much sharper. Nothing on DX format comes close,
....
The Sigma 8-16 DX lens is extreme and unique (as is the Sigma FX 12-
24).

Yes exactly, the Sigma 8-16 beats the Nikkor 18-35.

No -it's just wider - same as the 12-24 on FX. It also can't be fitted
with a protective filter, and every review I've read of it comments on
decentering issues.