Sigma 70-300mm

kbtimages

3

20 Apr 2010 - 2:08 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

I have found the sigma to be quite slow in focusing and the images are quite soft. this can fixed using ACR and clarity though. I have the Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro and rarely use it TBH.

Helpful Post!

cats_123 (e2 Member)

9

20 Apr 2010 - 2:28 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

have had mine for a few months now...am reasonably pleased with it, although haven't tried at an event, the motor drive is pretty good for burst shooting. I also have a Nikkor 55-200 which gives a sharper finish

Helpful Post!

cameracat (e2 Member)

9

20 Apr 2010 - 3:31 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

Bite the bullet and buy the Nikon 70-300 ED VR or suffer the consequences......

I have used the Nikon 70-300 ED VR, For fast moving ( Border Collie ) Dawg images, Many of them with the dawg coming at me head on, Also used this lens a lot at local " Horse shows " covering everything from show jumpint to eventing, For the money the quality of the images is hard to beat.....

It does not claim to be a " Macro " lens.....However zooms in this sector that do, Are Not true macro lens, They just close focus, You do not get 1 : 1 life size images.....

Anyhow if you want a macro lens, Then buy a proper macro lens......

Oh! Did I forget to mention the 2 stage VR on the Nikon lens.......Very usefull when required in low light or forced low ISO situations, No it will not stop the subject movement, But it does help reduce hand held camera shake, When using at extreme focal range.

I was thinking of buying the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VRII, Specially for sport subjects, But while I'm getting such great results from my Nikon 70-300 ED VR, I'll keep the £1200 extra quid it would cost to by the 70-200mm, Until I can really justify it.......

Working with sports or fast moving subjects, Is as much about technique as it is equipment you use......

Helpful Post!

paperboy

3

20 Apr 2010 - 3:43 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

nikon 70-300 vr or nothing. Sigma is a poor choice by comparison.

@vince...I have both Nikons, albeit the original 70-200 vr, and use the 70-300 5:1 over the 70-200 which in actual use is a low light indoor event lens IMHO. a great lens, but in general the 70-300 is more useful.

Helpful Post!

Nickscape

7

20 Apr 2010 - 4:33 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

As with most lenses in this price range it is never going to be as good as the more expensive alternatives. For £100 you really cannot go wrong, I have one and have used it for sports, wildlife and landscapes and to be honest have never been dissapointed with the results and I regularily use top of the range kit. With these cheaper lenses you have to spend the time getting used to them and working out what it can do and can't do, once you find the sweet spot the results really are excellent. The focusing is much slower than the pro equivalents, but with some basic good camera skills you just need to make sure you are prepared, you cannot expect to point and shoot, you will need to plan what you are going to do and think ahead, give the camera the chance and you will get good results. Make sure you get the APO version

Helpful Post!

saxon_image

9

20 Apr 2010 - 6:56 PM

• Options
  • Report Error / Abuse

0

The Sigma in APO version can be a very sharp lens if you get a good copy - I've been amazed at mine at times but its slow focusing and a bit clunky to use. I've just got a Nikon 70-300 VR and its a Rolls Royce in comparison - fast and accurate to focus and the VR really makes a difference. The Sigma is heading of the classifieds or eBay.

Paul

Helpful Post!