Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Sigma 70-200 or 170-500 for D300

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    WalidD300
    WalidD300  668 forum posts Scotland1 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 8:57 PM

    What woulkd you guys recommend?

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    19 Mar 2009 - 8:57 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    uggyy
    uggyy  82104 forum posts Scotland9 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 9:01 PM

    Whats it for?

    The sigma 70-200 F2.8 is an EX one, good quality pro sigma lens... The others ok but not in the same league.

    WalidD300
    WalidD300  668 forum posts Scotland1 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 9:17 PM

    it is for wild life,
    I would like to have nikon one but too expensive

    uggyy
    uggyy  82104 forum posts Scotland9 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 9:20 PM

    Check out the Sigma 100-300 F4 if your on a budget, also look at getting a 1.4 covertor to go with it. Good combo... Very underrated lens for its size and quality/price.

    The 70-200 F2.8 with a 1.4 works well too.

    The 170-500 Ive not used but I dont think its as sharp or well made as the two above but Im sure someone else can answer on that one...

    There is also the Nikon 80-400 VR which can be bought 2nd hand at reasonable price and well respected.

    Tommy

    WalidD300
    WalidD300  668 forum posts Scotland1 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 9:22 PM

    Thanks Tommy,
    I will look at 70-200 or 100-300

    GregMcKinnon
    19 Mar 2009 - 10:47 PM

    I've got the 70-200 f/2.8, beautiful lens. Perfectly sharp and very well built. No experience with the 170-500.

    focused-photography

    I have got the Sigma 170 - 500 mm lens. I think it is not a bad lens. Please have a look to my last Red Kite shots. They are all done with the Sigma 170 - 500 mm lens. All my other bird and wildlife shots are done with the same lens.

    Carsten

    Nick_w
    Nick_w e2 Member 73840 forum postsNick_w vcard England99 Constructive Critique Points
    19 Mar 2009 - 11:41 PM

    I'm with Tommy the 100-300 F4 is one of the most under rated lenses from Sigma - it takes a 1.4 TC well without any significant loss of image quality - quick auto focus. In terms of image quality it is by far and away the sharpest lens I have.

    WalidD300
    WalidD300  668 forum posts Scotland1 Constructive Critique Points
    20 Mar 2009 - 9:55 AM


    Quote: I have got the Sigma 170 - 500 mm lens. I think it is not a bad lens. Please have a look to my last Red Kite shots. They are all done with the Sigma 170 - 500 mm lens. All my other bird and wildlife shots are done with the same lens.

    Carsten

    Very fond of your porto, all over really like the lighting in the dark shots,

    Also, I like the 170-500mm, I will try it before I buy tho.

    Thanks

    strawman
    strawman  1022006 forum posts United Kingdom16 Constructive Critique Points
    20 Mar 2009 - 11:03 AM

    I used to have the 170-500, and used in the correct conditions and way it is effective, but I would say a lens like the newer 150-500 or the 100-300F4 (all from the sigma stable) have a greater range of conditions under which they will produce good images.

    Last Modified By strawman at 20 Mar 2009 - 11:05 AM
    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.