[Loddonjohn]

Good afternoon to everyone on this glorious sunny day ( Well in London it is )

I am looking for a cheap 70-300 zoom lens for my Nikon D50 ( funds are tight )

I was looking at the 2 lenses below

Nikon 70-300 F4.5.6 AF G lens.

Sigma APO 70-300 F4.5.6 Macro zoom.

Any thoughts or info from users of the 2 lenses would be most welcome, being a Nikon owner I tend to lean towards the Nikon but the Sigma has macro which could be useful.

Is there much to choose between the optics of both lenses? I think that they are not to different price wise. all advice and info much appreciated

Take care
John

[Markulous]

Well, I've been happy enough with the Sigma (non-APO) 70-300mm. Whilst I wouldn't generally take macro with it (not as sharp as my 105mm) the following was taken (mid mobile phone call, so one handed!)

[Loddonjohn]

Hi Mark,

Thank you for your quick response, Well no complaints with the macro then.

Was that at 300mm? and how far away were you?

Whats the APO all about then?

Take care
John

[JMitchell]

I have the APO, and even mark will agree that it is best to go with APO rather than non, just because the APO sorts out certain problems that arose with the original. I wouldn't buy the Nikon G-mount, doesn't get great reviews. I like the Sigma, and it is a good lens for cheap, which never underperforms for me.

For examples, see (I dunno if I gave you these already, or if mods will permit):
This

and all most of the ones at the beginning (almost all of them):
Here

HTH

Jack M

[Loddonjohn]

Hi Jack,

Thank you very much for that info and the pictures, it's looking like the Sigma then.

How does it handle with the D50? it looks a bigger lens than the Nikon, and does it struggle to focus in lowish light?
Thanks Jack.

John

[danpen]

I've not used the Nikon (I don't think it would fit on my EOS ) but have used the Sigma and was pleased with it, if I remember correctly you can only select the Macro mode at 300mm and it does 1:2 (half lifesize) with a reasonable working distance. It's a very versatile lens, everything it can do can be done better by something else but you wouldn't get it all for anything like the price of this lens. It's capable of some great results especially given a bit of thought to it's limitations (best to stop it down a little and, obviously use a tripod at the long end if possible.)

IMHO generally, if a Canon or Nikon Lens is a similar price to a Sigma the Sigma will be better. There are a lot of user reviews of this lens on another forum that I'm not allowed to mention, you may want to have a google.

cheers

Dan

[Loddonjohn]

Dan,

Thank you for your input, yes iv'e has a look at the reviews for both lenses and seen some good and some bad reviews for both lenses, though the Nikon seems to go from Brilliant with some people to Total Crap with others, looks like its going to be the Sigma..

John

[JMitchell]

Originally Posted by Loddonjohn

Hi Jack,

Thank you very much for that info and the pictures, it's looking like the Sigma then.

How does it handle with the D50? it looks a bigger lens than the Nikon, and does it struggle to focus in lowish light?
Thanks Jack.

John

It is quite big, when extended, but tbh, it's not a biggie. It's quite light, not the most amazing build quality, but nothing to worry about, metal lens mount too which is a plus. It does hunt a little in low light, but generally this is not a massive problem as long as the thing you are shooting at is in more light than its surroundings, such as with the Grease production shots.

Hope I have given you useful info

JM


EDIT: FORGOT TO MENTION! The reason you might be seeing some good reviews and some bad is because the quality (IQ) of the lens seems to vary between specimens. It is cheap in the shops (I bought mine in Jessops for £179), and it is important to try your best in the shop (admittedly with limited resources) to try and discern the macro quality at the long end, as this is where the complainers say the images come out 'soft'. I have had no such trouble, but others have, so make sure you check that!

[Loddonjohn]

Hi Jack,

Thank you for all of the useful info, I will get the sigma hope to be able to get out over the weekend to go and have a look at one.

I was thinking earlier that I might have a go with the macro setting something that I have never tried before, Marks one handed shot of the dragon fly is quite good considering it's a snatched shot, nice colors.

Jack some nice images in your album, I like them. A blowy thing! not very technical Jack.

Take care
John.

[JMitchell]

Originally Posted by Loddonjohn

Hi Jack,

Thank you for all of the useful info, I will get the sigma hope to be able to get out over the weekend to go and have a look at one.

I was thinking earlier that I might have a go with the macro setting something that I have never tried before, Marks one handed shot of the dragon fly is quite good considering it's a snatched shot, nice colors.

Jack some nice images in your album, I like them. A blowy thing! not very technical Jack.

Take care
John.

Good choice methinks, look forward to hearing (shop visit) and seeing (once you buy it ) how you get on. And as for the blowy thing, well, isn't that what everyone says

[orangepeel]

I've got the Nikon. It's crap. Noisy (physically), slow to focus, hunts like an NRA apologist, softer than a newborns first turd*.

It's cheap tho Mine cost me £45 delivered new.


*From 70-200mm you can go down to F8. Over 200mm you need F11. Larger apertures result in softness.

[danpen]

John,

I reckon that's the right choice, enjoy ...

cheers

Dan

[Loddonjohn]

Jack,

I added to your reputation old son..

John

[Loddonjohn]

Thank you Dan I'm sure that I will.

Orangepeel,

Yes I had checked out your review on the site, pretty dire. 45 quid though.

John