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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 23, 2007, 4:33 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Is this lens sharp at all focals ?

Compared to a Nikkor 70-300mmVR
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Aug 28, 2007, 6:48 PM   #2
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

From the reviews it seems to be slightly less sharp than the 70-300 and I'm intrigued why you are comparing these as they are almost apples and oranges and would put them down for quite different uses.

Do you have the 70-300 VR at the moment and looking for a new lens? What do you want the new lens for?

Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 3:15 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

I don`t have the Nikon 70-300VR and i`m looking to buy a telezoom lens to complete my Nikon 18-70.

My first thoughts went for this lens as it is very similar in quality to my 18-70 and i like the extra reach to capture pictures without people really noticing anything.

It`s just a few comments from other photographers who told me : "and what about the 50-150 , it`s very bright (constant 2.8, not too big and heavy ?

So i`m just trying to ask around what other people think about this comparaison

:?
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 4:04 AM   #4
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

I see, if you want a bit more dof control you will get this at the wider angles with the Sigma but the reach is limited. If you wanted to do sports at a close distance then having 2.8 is helpful, as a portrait lens the Sigma should do a much better job. If you are looking for a walk around telephoto then I would probably be looking more at the 70-300 for the extra reach.
Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 29, 2007, 5:16 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
guillermovilas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Hasselt , Belgium
Posts: 794
Default

Thanks i`m going to go for the Nikon , it`s such a good lens
guillermovilas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 8:23 AM   #6
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 58
Default

On the subject of the new 50-150 sigma f2.8, this sounds tempting at under £1000, Quality & speed rolled into 1. I admit I'm tempted.

Euipment already

I already have a standard 50mmf2.8 EF Canon that was under £100

The 28-300 Canon L series USMis of courseexcellent!

I also have a Canon75-300mm USM

35-80 USM.

Conclusion

I want to photograph flame throwers and use a lens that will give me a combination of speed and quaity is this worth it?

Mr Shift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 12:09 PM   #7
Super Moderator
 
Mark1616's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 7,452
Default

Mr Shift wrote:
Quote:
Conclusion

I want to photograph flame throwers and use a lens that will give me a combination of speed and quaity is this worth it?
OK showing my ignorance here, are you talking about the military kind of portable flame thrower, or flame thrower from a vehicle or something else?



Mark1616 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 12, 2007, 5:33 PM   #8
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 58
Default

People holding what they call poesor pogs lit or blowing fire and jugiling sticks on fire in a park
Mr Shift 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 2:18 AM.