10th June 2004, 05:17 PM
Which 70-300mm Zoom is better?
Hi, i am using a Nikon F80. Thinking to get a 70-300mm telephoto zoom lens. Great for travel without the hassle to carry a f/2.8 version. Which one would you suggest. Perhaps those with the following lens and share their experience:
1) Nikkor 70-300 ED
2) Nikkor 70-210mm (Discontinued but avail in 2nd hand shops)
3) Nikkor 75-300mm (Discontinued but avail in 2nd hand shops)
4) Sigma 70-300 APO (with red ring)
5) Tamron 70-300 LD
Thanks for advice.
10th June 2004, 05:29 PM
Nobody got any of the above lens?
10th June 2004, 05:39 PM
Try moving the thread to the Nikon forum. Might get more hits there.
Originally Posted by Bernard Ong
Personally, I use the 70-300 ED and while there have been some reviews saying that there is distortion at the longer end, I find it to be negligible. And it is definitely small and light enough for travelling.
10th June 2004, 06:02 PM
11th June 2004, 01:33 AM
11th June 2004, 08:34 PM
Your pictures are unbelievably sharp! I can't believe it's from Sigma 70-300mm APO.
Thanks for sharing.
11th June 2004, 08:44 PM
Very nice and sharp pics!
Are these straight off the camera (ie. no post processing except for resizing?)
12th June 2004, 01:24 AM
Honestly, any lens made by any decent lens maker will look sharp when resize to 800x600.... almost all, save for the TAMRON 19-35. So while u can estimate the rough sharpness, this is not really a true gauge for sharpness. You have to look at 100% crops... . And if u only view images in these sizes, or print photos no more than 4R, then.... almost any lens will suit your taste.
I'm a bit lazy to do 100% crops, but from what I see , and in comparison with the legendary Nikkor 50mm prime, the SIGMA 70-300 is indeed a sharp lens in the 70-220mm (well 270mm if u are not picky) range. I'm constantly astounded by its sharpness in the 70-150mm range near wide open apertures. Its seriously sharp, no kidding. AF is slow though, but all lens at this price is slow.
The images have been tweaked a little, but no PS trickery here. An image has to be generally good for it to look good. I cant make a unsharp image razor sharp looking.
12th June 2004, 08:32 PM
Yeah, I agree entirely with Marc. The Sigma is hell of a sharp lens for that price. Be it based on individual views or lens test reports, that is a fabulous lens.
Unless you're shooting sports where AF speed is essential, the slow AF speed does border me. I have tried shooting the Powerboat race with it. Under cloudy sky, but pretty bright, AF speed not much of a problem provided you pre-focus first, so that the lens can focus lock quickly when you press the shutter.
12th June 2004, 08:53 PM
13th June 2004, 02:20 PM
If u wanna know more about shooting for ROM, do post a new topic about it. Do not deviate from the topic in this thread. I bought mine really cheap used...... you shld be able to get one ard the $250 mark used. And a tripod is useless at the ROM, save for family portraits. Now back to the topic !
Originally Posted by sinus123
13th June 2004, 07:42 PM
So sorry hor for deviating to another talk c@#k session... Will post in another thread then...
Thanks for the advice....