Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 10, 2006, 4:27 AM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 43
Default

Sorry it'll have been asked a million times before but i need a longer lens to complement my 18-70mm. Needs to be relatively cheap right now and my intention is for it to be a stepping stone to a higher quality lens later on.

In the uk the sigma is 1.5 to 2 times the price of the nikkor.

I've been deliberating for months and can't decide.

Please help,

cheers

ps.. is the sigma front element fixed (like the 18-70) or does it rotate.
nacoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 10, 2006, 2:59 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
goomer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Kamloops, B.C.
Posts: 378
Default

I have the Sigma in question, and from all my research have found this lens to be superior to the Nikkor G lens. I found the construction to be much more solid than the G lens. While the macro is a 1:2 , it's still a feature I've found useful to have. Sadly though the front element does rotate, but this is true for most low end lenses I've seen. As for price, I got mine on sale, and it was only $20.00 CAD more than the Nikkor.
goomer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 3:49 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
StevenC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 218
Default

The sigma. No question.
StevenC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 3:52 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 43
Default

i have just found out that my local jessops may have a mint condition boxed nikkor 70-300g 2nd hand for 50 quid (100 CAD). I think that is gonna seal the deal.

If all i get is half decent images @f/8 and 200mm max zoom and one half decent summer out of it then it'll be worth it.
nacoya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 10, 2006, 5:55 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 226
Default

Sounds good at that price, you will probably get that money back when you come to sell it on say e-bay, as the lens has been going for around £70 on there.


norm smith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 12, 2006, 4:58 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
tommysdad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 714
Default

I got the 70-300G lens in myD50 kit .I took it back to Jessops the next Day.It was very noisy and bulky.

The AF makes a loud clunking noise when searching,If your planning to use it for birding it may scare them off.



TD

tommysdad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 13, 2006, 6:31 AM   #7
Senior Member
 
cameranserai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 548
Default

If you are buying second hand look preferably for the 75/300 f4.5/5.6. It is an old lens but all in metal and infinitely sharper than the new lens. The AF isn't too fast but it works just fine as a travelling lens on both my D70 and D2X.
cameranserai is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2006, 7:53 AM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4
Default

I bought the 70-300g and never had any problems with it... I can't tell you if it's worst or better than the sigma because I don't have the sigma, but everyone should try to learn how to use the material they have before judging it







Gothos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2006, 9:35 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 163
Default

Hi there all

Gothos cool pic of the bird

can you tell me what was the distance between you and the bird.

I've just bought a D50 with the 2 kit lens 18-55 and 55-200 and so far my pics haven't been much to write home but but that ain't the cameras fault.

did you use a tripod for these shots.

cheers

mark
wadge1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 2, 2006, 11:27 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 226
Default

Gothos, totally agree about taking time to learn howto get the best out of kit. Not sure how you did it, but I also appreciate the way you got your exif info displayed at the top of the pic - it makes the pic twice as useful. That looks a hard shot, with so much sky etc and for my eyes (or at least my monitor), perhaps a tad over-exposed (yikes - what do i know !!!!)

I did have the G lens on my old film Nikon 75 and it was fine for me, though i am led to believe that it performs better on a digital body because the smaller sensor just uses the sweet spot of the lens (ie the centre), don't know if that is true, but it makes sense.

Mark, i have the Nikon 55-200 and have been pleased with it. i will be replcing mine with a sigma 70-300 but that is only because I like wildlife and the thought of getting the extra reach plus macro won me over - otherwise, i wouldbe happy to stick with my 55-200.

It gives meimagesthat have a sharpness that are fine to my eyes and i have been able to freeze a duck mid flight (at 1/1600) and retain pretty good detail.my problem is that a small bird is still a small bird at 200mm. Though I did a woodpecker at the 200mm end and then did a heavy crop,the 7 x 5 print looked really fine and i will test a bigger print, just to see how much cropping i can get away with.

I use an Epsom R240, which is a cheap printer, but the results are much nicer than what i see on the monitor. I hope your 55-200 grabs that nice shot that restores your faith in the lens - though the weather is poor in the UK at present and not much sign of getting better this week (thats the downside of owning a D50 -I now watch the weather reports !!!!!!!)
norm smith is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:47 PM.