Sigma APO Super II 70-300mm for Nikon?

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

Can anybody recommend or discourage the Sigma APO Super II 70-300mm f4-5.6
lens for my Nikon D70? I am in need of a long lens and I am intrigued
by macro [I know this lense is not a true macro]. I have been comparing
this lens to the Nikon 70-300G, Nikon 70-300 ED and the Tamron version
as well. I have found in various reviews that the Sigma appears to be
sharper at longer focal lengths than the Nikon or Tamron. Further,
there is a lot of speculation that the Nikon ED IS a Tamron built lens
as it shares the same characteristics.

Thoughts? I really can't exceed the $200 price range at the moment.

This is $200 better spent almost anywhere else.

First off, in any zoom, a zoom ratio more than about 2.5:1 is a sign of
over reaching. (Some exceptions like the Canon 100-400 IS do exist, but
there is a price to pay).

While it may be sharper at the long end than comparable lenses, the
comparison should state "least crappy" as opposed to "best of".

Tamron build some high quality lenses for Minolta. That they would do
so for Nikon (or for that matter Canon) would be no surprise. But
again, be wary of high FL ratio lenses at low price. You typically get
what you pay for.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

My primary range will likely be in the mid focal lengths of the lens
anyway, as I am aware of the limitations of a slower [and cheaper] lens
at longer focal lengths.

So, are you recommending the Tamron 572D (AF70-300MM F/4-5.6 LD Macro)?
That seems to share the same characteristics. What would you recommend
for ~$200+-50?

For your goals, I'd recommend stashing the cash and putting $20 aside
every week until you have $800. Then you can get the 80-200 f/2.8 D.
No macro but a very decent telezoom.

Sorry to sound 'lofty' but that's the way I see it.

If you're itching to spend $200 - $250 for your Nikon asap:

Save (or indebt yourself) another $200 and buy a Tamron 90mm f/2.8
macro. Then you'll have a very decent portrait lens and a great macro
lens. It's about $460 new at B&H.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- slr-systems FAQ project: http://tinyurl.com/6m9aw
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.

Alan Browne wrote:

For your goals, I'd recommend stashing the cash and putting $20 aside
every week until you have $800. Then you can get the 80-200 f/2.8 D.
No macro but a very decent telezoom.

Or, I'd recommend looking for a used one on eBay or B&H's used department.
You can find them a bit cheaper, and used lenses in excellent condition are
pretty much just like buying a new one. (Most of the lenses I have were
bought used.)

--
Jeremy |

"Jeremy Nixon" wrote in message
...
Alan Browne wrote:

For your goals, I'd recommend stashing the cash and putting $20 aside
every week until you have $800. Then you can get the 80-200 f/2.8 D.
No macro but a very decent telezoom.

Or, I'd recommend looking for a used one on eBay or B&H's used department.
You can find them a bit cheaper, and used lenses in excellent condition
are
pretty much just like buying a new one. (Most of the lenses I have were
bought used.)

--
Jeremy |


I'd agree with Alan and Jeremy in that the Tamron or Sigma zoom will not
satisfy at all. Particularly the Tamron!!! Personal experience says go
with the 80-200 2.8D after waiting to save a bit. (Also check used)
However, the Tamron Macro is a great lens as has been mentioned.
Bob

Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:

I ended up finally getting a used Nikon 70-210mm AF f/4-5.6 (not D ...
so I lose a the matrix metering).

No, don't worry -- you don't lose matrix metering, you just lose "3D
matrix metering". All the "D" means is that the lens tells the camera
its focus distance; the camera can then use that in its exposure
calculations. Except with flash metering, where camera to subject
distance matters a lot, this doesn't seem to make much difference in
practice. The "D" feature is minor; don't worry about it.

--
Jeremy |