|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#11 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Frazier Park, CA
Posts: 15,056
|
simowills wrote:
Quote:
Having said that, though, I've seen a number of people post outstanding pictures here taken with the Sigma 70-300 APO and the Tamron equivalent. I would be interested if someone would do a head to head competition (especially if they are better at taking comparisons than I am!). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 661
|
simowills wrote:
Quote:
http://forums.steves-digicams.com/fo...mp;forum_id=80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Chicago Suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 2,726
|
simowills wrote:
Quote:
Most zooms won't compete with a premium prime in the same focal length, but in this case (and there are others) we're talking about zooms which are designed with pro level speed and optical performance in mind (with a correspondingly high price tag), so the "rule" gets a little blurry. Some "Pro" level zooms like this one, while they won't give you quite the same numbers in a formal resolution test, will be so close that it really doesn't matter that much in normal field use, especially when the lens was designed to give close to optimum performance at the long end. With this particular lens, there have been reports of example variation in focusing accuracy, but the good ones are very very good (as you can see in Ronny's shots, for example). I'd put it in the same optical class as the *300/4/4.5s, with the * lenses getting the nod (barely) in absolute resolution. What the DA*300/4 might bring remains to be seen, but until it's out, the Sigma 100-300/4 is the best reasonably fast, reasonably available 300mm alternative out there, and if you've got a good one, I doubt that you'd be looking for a replacement from an optical performance standpoint, even if the DA* is as good as the * designation suggests it will be. The only practical reason would be that the DA*300/4 should be over a lb lighter (under 2 lbs as opposed to over 3 lbs), and will probably be significantly smaller, and that lb can make a very big difference when you're talking about easily handholding it over an extended shoot. Scott |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Mornington, Australia
Posts: 644
|
Thanks to all,
What I take from the comments that have been made is what I was hoping for, I suppose. The impression I get is that the "Ex" type lens are an upper level lens designed to deliver very good performane for thoes wishing to keep the majority of their shoots, and internal organs.... I suppose when I'm 100% better and taking the shots then I'll be looking for the 20% (or watever ) better glass performance. Maybe I should look at the results of what I have and say to myself "that's ok" instead of "if I'de only done....... , or had...... ) Thanks again Simon |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 116
|
ishino wrote:
Quote:
I got my Sigma 70-300 APO DG f/4-5.6 a few days ago...... Different price category, but I'm definitely looking forward to testing it out soon. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|