Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG MACRO (nikon mount)

[akagi07]

Hi,

Like to check the above, anyone using it much on a nikon system?
I search ard on the web for reviews, mostly making it a temptation for me to own it but I couldn't find the main impt ans, which is does the len has vibration reduction function?

Some site say it doesn't yet some site didn't mention at all.

 

[Reportage]

Hi,

Like to check the above, anyone using it much on a nikon system?
I search ard on the web for reviews, mostly making it a temptation for me to own it but I couldn't find the main impt ans, which is does the len has vibration reduction function?

Some site say it doesn't yet some site didn't mention at all.

for Sigma, the abbreviation is "OS" aka VR for Nikkor.

 

[Rashkae]

for Sigma, the abbreviation is "OS" aka VR for Nikkor.

so, if it doesn't say OS, there's no VR.

 

[DjThugs]

i am using it with both my D40x and D200...the lens is great..just that u need a focusing distanc eof 1.5m away..which might be a hinderence..it doesnt have VR functions on it..at 300mm..u either u a tripod or use in daylight to reduce the cam-shake..at night..i use a tripod with it + remote..if not shake is obvious

 

[Blur Shadow]

This lens does not have a "Vibration Reduction" or similar function.

It is, however, a great lens. Sure beats the Nikon 70-300mm G lens.

 

[akagi07]

ok main purpose is for the zoom and minimum for the macro but due to its price, ya tt attracts me.

i am using it with both my D40x and D200...the lens is great..just that u need a focusing distanc eof 1.5m away..which might be a hinderence..it doesnt have VR functions on it..at 300mm..u either u a tripod or use in daylight to reduce the cam-shake..at night..i use a tripod with it + remote..if not shake is obvious

Meaning in broad day light or close to evening time, the shake is obvious? can the confirmation be more firm?
Cos usually I dont realli bring the tripod out unless i serious plann for night shoot.

 

[jnet6]

ok main purpose is for the zoom and minimum for the macro but due to its price, ya tt attracts me.



Meaning in broad day light or close to evening time, the shake is obvious? can the confirmation be more firm?
Cos usually I dont realli bring the tripod out unless i serious plann for night shoot.

Yes. anylens more then 150mm, you can see the shake frm viewfinder if you are in low light and depends on your handheld tactics.

Another option will be nikon 70-300VR though may stretch your budget but worth the price.

 

[Blur Shadow]

You'd just have to abide by the 1/focal length rule...

The Nikon 70-300mm VR is more expensive...

 

[cheguthamrin]

I own one. No VR.
Depends what you wanna shoot. its not a fast lens, the motor kinda noisy and take quite sometime to focus, I've yet to get used to it altho its almost 1 year of usage.

Sample shots:
1
2
3

 

[akagi07]

I own one. No VR.
Depends what you wanna shoot. its not a fast lens, the motor kinda noisy and take quite sometime to focus, I've yet to get used to it altho its almost 1 year of usage.

Sample shots:
1
2
3

Your samples seem good to me.
But importantly is that shake is unavoidable if zoomed too much ok, but in another words setting to a faster shutter and in good light condition this lens can perform good result? am i right?

additionally, anyone know the market price of this len, and would there be a OS version after this APO type?

 

[DjThugs]

if u want my honest opinion..i do think its a much better lens than the Nikkor 780-300mm G lens...but well..to each his own..when i zoom out to 300mm...i make use of my SB-800 alot..

 

[Krisgage]

I just bought this lens and went to test it at 70mm and at full tele 300mm and its 200-300mm macro function. In my opinion, it is a good lens. It is sharp at full tele and the 200-300mm macro is great, all with nice bokeh. The only disadvanture will be it is do not have vibration reduction, thus use it for daylight shoot is great but for night you need a tripod. If you need sample photo, you could PM me and I show you. Cheers !

 

[Krisgage]

The price range I know of is between $300-$400.

 

[kelvgoh]

Though I use a Canon system, I too have the Sigma 70-300mm. Its a great lens, even in low light conditions. Great contrast.

This shot was taken using a Canon EOS 350D, Sigma 70-300mm lens using a monopod in a forested area.
Focal Length : 300mm
Aperture: f/5.6
Shutter: 1/250mm

This shot was taken using a Canon EOS 350D, Sigma 70-300mm lens using a tripod on a balcony next to a beach.
Focal Length : 190mm
Aperture: f/5
Shutter: 1/60mm

Kelvin

 

[Blur Shadow]

if u want my honest opinion..i do think its a much better lens than the Nikkor 780-300mm G lens...but well..to each his own..when i zoom out to 300mm...i make use of my SB-800 alot..

You mean the Nikkor 70-300mm G lens right?

Do you really think so? I have used both and think the Sigma is superior. The Nikkor is fairly soft at 300mm. I mean, so is the Sigma, but more so in the Nikkor.

 

[akagi07]

Though I use a Canon system, I too have the Sigma 70-300mm. Its a great lens, even in low light conditions. Great contrast.

This shot was taken using a Canon EOS 350D, Sigma 70-300mm lens using a monopod in a forested area.
Focal Length : 300mm
Aperture: f/5.6
Shutter: 1/250mm

This shot was taken using a Canon EOS 350D, Sigma 70-300mm lens using a tripod on a balcony next to a beach.
Focal Length : 190mm
Aperture: f/5
Shutter: 1/60mm

Kelvin

hey hey thanks for the samples. real nice.. more and more tempted to this sigma..
on my journey back just now i still ponder nikon 70-300VR which is more than 2x of signma price, and the price more like for the VR feature. on budget right now..

many thanks again

 

[akagi07]

now i guesss mine next move was to confirm to put my hand to settle the deal of this sigma lens, other than thinking of getting a tokina 12-24 and a SB600.
checked out in AMk MScolor, sigma was $320, which hai.. i ask the sales assistent initially, he refer to the price booklet, i winked and saw $320, he tell mi $340 then i ask if cheaper, he told me $320. "nice" business tactic.

anyway, a nikon 70-300 is $760.. man the price

 

[akagi07]

using back the old thread to compare few telezoom lens
NIKON
- 70-300VR (some sites say its more like 70-200, as anything greater and to 300, IQ drop)
- 55-200VR (most sites seem to be okay about it)
- 18-200VR (out cos dun mind changing of lens)

didnt check out much on 3rd parties other than this sigma lens in the topic

someone got some views on which is a better or best tele to get? I'm not planning to shoot birds but more like trying to reach further than the provided 105mm

 

[Blur Shadow]

I was previously evaluating between the Nikon AF-S DX VR Zoom-Nikkor 55-200mm f/4-5.6G IF-ED and the Nikon AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED. Decided on the former for the following reasons.

1. Price. The 55-200mm VR was mine for S$300. The 70-300mm VR costs more than twice of that.
2. Image quality. The 55-200mm VR performs well for its price. I really cannot complain.
3. Weight. It's remarkably light. I considered it as a bonus more than a key consideration though.

The 70-300VR does have some marked advantages:
1. Reach. Obviously further reach, but like you mentioned, IQ drops, although I'd still say it's fair given its price. The price of a 300mm f/2.8 prime is astronomical!
2. Build quality. Definitely superior to the 55-200VR and the Sigma
3. Technical quality. It may just be me, but the 70-300mm seems to focus faster and have superior VR.

The 55-200mm VR got me at the price though... Hehe!