Should i buy this? quick advice needed!

JAW

Stumbled across this but thought i'd ask for you guys' wisdom before buying:

http://www.warehouseexpress.com/product/default.aspx?sku=1008570

What do you reckon? I've used a sigma 70-300 on my d50 before and loved it so shall i go for it?

Cheers!

_________________

Click on my sig...

JAW · Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject:

BUMP
_________________

Click on my sig...

Hamish · Forum Veteran Joined: 29 Sep 2006 Posts: 1011

No idea.

Sigma make some good stuff and some average stuff. I have no idea where that particular lens fits.

I do know that the Nikon 70-300 VR gets very good reviews. But it's quite a bit pricier.
_________________
Hamish

bluebomberx · Quite High User Joined: 01 Oct 2006 Posts: 134

I'm not privy to the UK/US conversion rates, but I do know that Sigma makes two variations of the 70-300 lens. The one that is more expensive is the one that gets good marks. A friend of mine asked me for advice on a lens to get for his fiance around Christmas. He ended up going with the lens in question. I did a quick test for him on my 5D to make sure it worked and it did. It proved to be a sharp lens for the money. Don't expect it to focus swiftly though. It was rather slow to rack from minimum to infinity.

JAW · Posted: Sat Jul 12, 2008 6:34 pm Post subject:

Cool. The only problem is that a swift auto focus is sometimes necessary for biking shots!
_________________

Click on my sig...

bluebomberx · Quite High User Joined: 01 Oct 2006 Posts: 134

Pre-foucus, my man. Pre-focus. Wink

That is actually one of the reasons you see so many wide angle shots for mountain biking. The depth of field is huge at smaller apertures. Even at f/11 a 70-300 lens would have very limited depth of field on the mid to longer end of the lens.

I have yet to shoot any mountain biking. hahaha But the trails that I have experience with around here prove that a 70-200 f/2.8 would be of limited utility in most areas of the trail. From some of the photos I've seen you guys post on these wide open hillsides, I could see how a telephoto would come in handy. All the local single track is heavily forested. With ticks and chiggers waiting to eat you if you step of the trail. LOL

Sam_G · Not quite so newbie Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 15

I use the more expensive APO version, it seems good, but tbh, i dont have masses to compare it to. I have read contrasting reviews on whether or not the extra for the APO is worth it, some say definately, some say meh.

That said, i have only shot birds with it in the past, wouldn't really see much point for biking (for me).

JAW · Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2008 8:49 pm Post subject:

How much extra is it?
_________________

Click on my sig...

Sam_G · Not quite so newbie Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 15

Hmmm, thats funny, when i bought mine, the average was around £150, i presumed it would be around £120 now, but its nearer £190.

There is a review here:
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/Sigma-70-300mm-F4-56-APO-DG-Macro

Saying the difference between them is the SLD glass.

George · Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 5:03 pm Post subject:

I used to have that lens for Canon mount and it was superb, bar the lack of decent AF and the dust got right into it pretty easily!

The image quality was amazing and really very good. My 70-200 f/4L delivers great results and the Sigma wasn't far behind, though the colours aren't as bright.
_________________
MTB-Addict
Flickr

JAW · Posted: Tue Jul 15, 2008 6:00 pm Post subject: