Author Topic: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG MACRO? (Read 6543 times)

Peter · « **on:** October 18, 2007, 13:19 »

Can you tell me something more about this lens? It is soo cheap I cant believe it! It cost 100 euro. I know it is not top performer, and probably lausy quality, but for that money, I like those 300 mm, if not for stock photography, then for vacations in nature with my friends, for shooting wildlife.

Is it such bad lens? Or is it worth 100 euros? What can you tell me from your own expirience, if you had this lens?

Thanks.

P.s.

No, I do not have money for Canon L lens, so do not suggest something more expensive, I am considering this only because it is so cheap, if it is 200 euros, I would not even think about it...

swedstock · « **Reply #1 on:** October 18, 2007, 13:25 »

I have that lens but i rarely use it. It is not a top performer but it is as you say, a lot of lens for the money.

hatman12 · « **Reply #2 on:** October 18, 2007, 13:27 »

If you pay bottom price you get bottom price results.

Peter · « **Reply #3 on:** October 18, 2007, 13:53 »

Yeah, but what are those "bottom" results. Can someone put 100% croop of the image taken with that lens. Some nature scene, taken on daylight?

vonkara · « **Reply #4 on:** October 18, 2007, 13:59 »

I have a Nikon 70-300. Barely all my pictures taken whit this lens are refused for mostly chromatic aberrations and blurry shot. That because of the poor quality of this lens.

Now the Sigma, even APO is worst. Here is a review

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_70300_456/index.htm

You can see the huge amount of chromatic aberration. The sharpness at 70mm is correct but highly decrease at 200 and 300mm.

You better keep your money to a good one like the Sigma 150 f2.8, who is at a cheaper price (899 CAD) than the Nikon 105 f2.8. It also deliver a little more sharpness and less chromatic aberration... (This is on the D200 body)

leaf · « **Reply #5 on:** October 18, 2007, 14:19 »

that review said it was an ok lens for the $$. obviously if you are only paying that amount you can't expect a good lens, but if chode just wants something to take snaps with it might serve his purpopse well. I think we have been conditioned to believe that we ALWAYS need the best and most expensive.

Going for a one night tenting trip we think we need the same gear people use to climb mount everest.

Taking some snaps we are lead to believe we need a $2000 lens.

---------

when we are working on the other hand and actually NEED to produce crisp clean sharp images that is another question, that is when mount everest comes in and the expensive gear.

Peter · « **Reply #6 on:** October 18, 2007, 14:56 »

Thanx guys. I will reconsider it, and think about it more further.

sharply_done · « **Reply #7 on:** October 18, 2007, 15:00 »

Consider buying a used lens: higher quality, lower price.

Peter · « **Reply #8 on:** October 18, 2007, 15:54 »

I am considering Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM now... It seem better lens?

Bateleur · « **Reply #9 on:** October 18, 2007, 16:00 »

Quote from: Vonkara on October 18, 2007, 13:59

I have a Nikon 70-300. Barely all my pictures taken whit this lens are refused for mostly chromatic aberrations and blurry shot. That because of the poor quality of this lens.

Which Nikon 70-300 do you have?

vonkara · « **Reply #10 on:** October 18, 2007, 18:06 »

Quote from: Bateleur on October 18, 2007, 16:00

Quote from: Vonkara on October 18, 2007, 13:59

I have a Nikon 70-300. Barely all my pictures taken whit this lens are refused for mostly chromatic aberrations and blurry shot. That because of the poor quality of this lens.

Which Nikon 70-300 do you have?

Exactly it's the AF 4/5.6 G, who give me some nice shot, but when the background is dark or saturated whit colors it's a little limit... especially for IS. It mostly accepted at FT and it sale there, but it's very desapointing for IS. I give you the link for one of them taken whit this lens

http://www.fotolia.com/id/4243689

Look at the edge of the stem and of the petal at the lower left (full zoom)

hatman12 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 18, 2007, 18:51 »

I've just received a Nikon 80-200mm F2.8 AF IF ED I found on eBay. I paid AUD $800 which is about USD $775. New in the shops here in Australia this lens retails for anywhere between AUD $1300 and $1600.

I buy my camera bodies new, but my lenses I try to find on eBay.

The gentleman who sold me this lens assured me it was hardly used - true to his word it appears completely unmarked and in brand new condition, and he even sent me the matching hard case which people try to sell separately for $150.

This year I've bought a 35mm F2, 20mm F2.8 and now this new beast. My only problem with this new lens is its sheer size and weight.

There are bargains to be found on ebay so long as one is prepared to spend time and be patient, and of course be very very careful.

Peter · « **Reply #12 on:** October 19, 2007, 07:52 »

how about Canon 100-300mm f4.5-5.6 USM? Is it a good lens?

MicrostockGroup Sponsors

Author Topic: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG MACRO? (Read 6543 times)

Peter

swedstock

hatman12

Peter

vonkara

leaf

Peter

sharply_done

Peter

Bateleur

vonkara

hatman12

Peter

Related Topics

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors