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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 8, 2005, 4:50 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
Default

Hi,

I am new to this forum and this is my first post so I hope I am filling this out correctly and you are able to read it. Just to give some background I have a D70 and shoot many different things from my kids doing sports and concertsto landscape shots in the mountains.

I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to compare these two lenses for optical performance. I have the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AFS that I purchased on e-bay a while back and love the pictures that I get. However, I must admit there are many times where it would be nice to have the zoom feature that is on the Sigma and can probably get a new Sigma for about what I can sell my Nikon for on e-bay. Still, I do not want to compromise much if any on the optical performance. On the Photozone website lens comparisons page, it has these lenses ratedvery close to each other, but I wanted to see what some other photography buffs such as yourselves thought. Also, if anyone knows how well the Sigma works with their 2x teleconverter please let me know as I frequently use the Nikon with my T20E with great results and would not want to lose that function. Any feedback and information would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in advance for your help :-), Doug
coloradodoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jul 9, 2005, 3:00 PM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

coloradodoug wrote:
Quote:
I was wondering if anyone has had a chance to compare these two lenses for optical performance.
Does Nikon post MTF curves?

You'll find the Photozone website is quite in agreement with theses MTF charts - The Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 EX slots right in between the Canon EF-300 f/2.8 L in shapnress and their EF-300 f/4 L -> If you find the plot for the Nikon 300mm f/2.8 AFS you'll know where it stands...

FYI - http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=54480&forum_id=65&jump_t o=292266#p292266

and http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=61235&forum_id=65&jump_t o=333864#p333864

also http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=30682
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2005, 11:53 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
Default

Thanks so much for the information. I used the links you put in and was able to look at some reviews on the Sigma lens. For some reason it looks like the Sigma lens is more hit and miss on Nikon body's compared to Canon -- either it works great or does not focus well at all.

I will also try to find the MTF chart for comparisons. What does MTF stand for?

Again, thanks for your help, Doug :-)
coloradodoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 10, 2005, 11:08 PM   #4
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

coloradodoug wrote:
Quote:
I will also try to find the MTF chart for comparisons. What does MTF stand for?
FYI - http://www.photozone.de/3Technology/mtf.htm


A few Nikon shooters over here too:
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=21475
http://www.photosig.com/go/photos/browse?id=24177
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 11, 2005, 10:56 PM   #5
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
Default

Thanks again for the info and links. They have been very helpful! Doug
coloradodoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 23, 2005, 10:26 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1
Default

Hi Coloradodoug, I have been using the Sigma 120 -300 2.8 for just over 18 months and before that I had a Nikon 300 2.8. I thought long and hard before getting the Sigma and i am glad I did. It has not let me down.

Sure. There are those out there that will say YUK! A Sigma.....generic crap. Well let me tell you, I have had Nikon lenses (expensive ones) that did not perform as well as I had expected. The Sigma lens is well built and will perform and last as long as you look after it. The zoom range is a great asset. I use this lens for photographing in the "outback" (after all I am from OZ) and have carted this lens from Sydney to Tasmania, far North Queensland, Adelaide, Perth, Darwin and even across to New Zealand AND New York.

Yep I love it, but youwill have probably made up your own mind by now.



Good luck
dingbat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 24, 2005, 9:55 AM   #7
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

When I compared the Sigma 120-300 f/2.8 - It slotted between the Canon EF-300 f/2.8L and the EF-300 f/4L in MTF's sharpness.

No brainer for me since it's only 1/2 the cost of the f/2.8 and much more flexible than a fixed 300 f/4 because it's a zoom - with a 2x teleconverter this lens is a 600mm and still only @ f/5.6 with full silent ultrasonic autofocus (AF-S) control:


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 14, 2005, 6:07 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 4
Default

Thanks for the info. I have been out of the country for a while and had not been able to check the forum. I found a Sigma 120-300 f2.8 lens on e-bay with both teleconverters included and after reading your response I figured I would give it a try. To make a long story short I just sold my Nikon on e-bay because the preformance was not enough of a difference for me compared to the usefullness of the zoom feature when shooting my kids playing sports. And I had money left over to buy the Nikon 12-24 f4 lens with the extra money.

Thanks again for your input,

Doug:-)
coloradodoug is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 15, 2005, 7:45 AM   #9
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,543
Default

IMO until folks overcome their 'allergy' to 3rd party lens, they don't know what they are missing:
http://www.stevesforums.com/forums/v...mp;forum_id=65


The Problem is most folks buy 'cheap' 3rd party consumer's lenses and compared theses to the expensive Nikkor's (or Canon 'L') while neglecting the more affordable high-end 'EX series' from Sigma (or XR from Tamron etc...) which are equally excellent!



coloradodoug wrote:
Quote:
... And I had money left over to buy the Nikon 12-24 f4 lens with the extra money.

Thanks again for your input,

Doug:-)
Is the Nikon 12-24 a full frame? If not check out the Sigma 12-24 EX which is, and will work with older film camera. This lens also comes with HSM which is silent and has the full-time AF overide as well:





NHL 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 12:57 PM.