Sigma 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 APO EX DG Macro

Not even an amateur yet, I've been fiddling around with my Nikon D70s
long enough to find that I sometimes wish I had a tele lens. I had a
look at the above in a photo shop, but I'm not qualified to say whether
it would be the right choice for me, nor am I able to make enough sense
of tests or online photo mags. So I come here to ask for any advice
regarding the lens, before I eventually get to buying one.

Thanks in advance (?)
ole k

ole kvaal wrote:
Not even an amateur yet, I've been fiddling around with my Nikon D70s
long enough to find that I sometimes wish I had a tele lens. I had a
look at the above in a photo shop, but I'm not qualified to say
whether it would be the right choice for me, nor am I able to make
enough sense of tests or online photo mags. So I come here to ask for
any advice regarding the lens, before I eventually get to buying one.

Thanks in advance (?)
ole k

With telephoto lenses, you may want to consider if VR/IS (vibration
reduction, image stabilisation) is something which will be useful to you.
When shooting in windy or moving environments, I find VR/IS invaluable.

Nikon do offer a low-cost VR lens - the 55 - 200mm. It's about US $250.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm

Cheers,
David

David J Taylor wrote:
With telephoto lenses, you may want to consider if VR/IS (vibration
reduction, image stabilisation) is something which will be useful to you.
When shooting in windy or moving environments, I find VR/IS invaluable.

Nikon do offer a low-cost VR lens - the 55 - 200mm. It's about US $250.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm


Thanks a lot. Compared to Norwegian prices, this is also a true bargain.
Anyway, I'll start checking on the used market. Thanks again for your
advice.


rgds,
ole k

"ole kvaal" wrote in message
...
David J Taylor wrote:
With telephoto lenses, you may want to consider if VR/IS (vibration
reduction, image stabilisation) is something which will be useful to you.
When shooting in windy or moving environments, I find VR/IS invaluable.

Nikon do offer a low-cost VR lens - the 55 - 200mm. It's about US $250.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm


Thanks a lot. Compared to Norwegian prices, this is also a true bargain.
Anyway, I'll start checking on the used market. Thanks again for your
advice.


rgds,
ole k

The macro feature is also pretty reasonable on the Sigma lens, here is a
shot I took using this lens.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/165/4...563ce9d0_o.jpg

And here is one at normal tele settings.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/206/4...0f3cb383_o.jpg

Pete D wrote:
The macro feature is also pretty reasonable on the Sigma lens, here is a
shot I took using this lens.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/165/4...563ce9d0_o.jpg

And here is one at normal tele settings.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/206/4...0f3cb383_o.jpg



Now those were rather impressive, and make me reconsider the Sigma lens.
Has the bird picture been much photoshopped?


Thanks a lot,
ole k

ole kvaal wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
With telephoto lenses, you may want to consider if VR/IS (vibration
reduction, image stabilisation) is something which will be useful to
you. When shooting in windy or moving environments, I find VR/IS
invaluable. Nikon do offer a low-cost VR lens - the 55 - 200mm. It's
about US
$250. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm


Thanks a lot. Compared to Norwegian prices, this is also a true
bargain. Anyway, I'll start checking on the used market. Thanks again
for your advice.


rgds,
ole k

You may be able to find this cheaper online. Whilst I would not recommend
them as a supplier:

Pixmania: GBP 223
http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/5367...nikkor-55.html

Cheers,
David

"ole kvaal" wrote in message
...
Not even an amateur yet, I've been fiddling around with my Nikon D70s long
enough to find that I sometimes wish I had a tele lens. I had a look at
the above in a photo shop, but I'm not qualified to say whether it would
be the right choice for me, nor am I able to make enough sense of tests or
online photo mags. So I come here to ask for any advice regarding the
lens, before I eventually get to buying one.

Thanks in advance (?)
ole k

I had the Sigma lens with my Canon 350D. I really liked the macro but was
unhappy with the performance at 300mm. I mortgated several birthdayt and
Christmases and bought the Canon 70-200 f4 L IS (image stabilised) lens +
the 1.4x tele-extender. The difference is amazing - the sharpness at full
tele is stunning compared to the sigma and I can take pics at full tele
without my monpod and get excellent results

Gordon

"David J Taylor"
wrote in message k...
ole kvaal wrote:
David J Taylor wrote:
With telephoto lenses, you may want to consider if VR/IS (vibration
reduction, image stabilisation) is something which will be useful to
you. When shooting in windy or moving environments, I find VR/IS
invaluable. Nikon do offer a low-cost VR lens - the 55 - 200mm. It's
about US
$250. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/55-200mm-vr.htm


Thanks a lot. Compared to Norwegian prices, this is also a true
bargain. Anyway, I'll start checking on the used market. Thanks again
for your advice.


rgds,
ole k

You may be able to find this cheaper online. Whilst I would not recommend
them as a supplier:

Pixmania: GBP 223

http://www.pixmania.co.uk/uk/uk/5367...nikkor-55.html

Cheers,
David

There are also quite a few on ebay from the same supplier £135 'buy now'.
Not that I have bought one, or can vouch for the seller.


--
RobertJM

"ole kvaal" wrote in message
...
Pete D wrote:
The macro feature is also pretty reasonable on the Sigma lens, here is a
shot I took using this lens.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/165/4...563ce9d0_o.jpg

And here is one at normal tele settings.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/206/4...0f3cb383_o.jpg

Now those were rather impressive, and make me reconsider the Sigma lens.
Has the bird picture been much photoshopped?


Thanks a lot,
ole k

Generally I am not a heavy PPer and this would be no exception. Do keep in
mind that all these lenses are at least a bit soft at the extremities and
looking at the price they are pretty compromise. I find www.photozone.de
invaluable for their lens testing, sometimes the same lens on different
systems give a different result.

"Gordon MacPherson" wrote in message
...

"ole kvaal" wrote in message
...
Not even an amateur yet, I've been fiddling around with my Nikon D70s
long enough to find that I sometimes wish I had a tele lens. I had a look
at the above in a photo shop, but I'm not qualified to say whether it
would be the right choice for me, nor am I able to make enough sense of
tests or online photo mags. So I come here to ask for any advice
regarding the lens, before I eventually get to buying one.

Thanks in advance (?)
ole k

I had the Sigma lens with my Canon 350D. I really liked the macro but was
unhappy with the performance at 300mm. I mortgated several birthdayt and
Christmases and bought the Canon 70-200 f4 L IS (image stabilised) lens +
the 1.4x tele-extender. The difference is amazing - the sharpness at full
tele is stunning compared to the sigma and I can take pics at full tele
without my monpod and get excellent results

Gordon


At 3-4 times the price I would expect nothing less.