Sigma 70-300mm APO

[Clart]

Been on the look out for one of these for a couple of weeks, 2nd hand ones have been going for approx £100 on ebay. Bought one yesterday from a UK seller for £72 brand new! good old ebay.

Think there are a few owners of this lens on here, is it any good?

 

[terribleclio]

£109 on onestop-digital.com, you got a good deal there, let me know what you reckon to it as it'll be my next purchase.

 

[Sym0n]

I ordered mine last Monday from purelygadgets.co.uk and even though they say it will take 2-5 days to get it to me...I'm still waiting. And their customer service is s**t.

Think I'm going to cancel my order now anyway, if I can, and order from onestop-digital as that's less then what I paid, so thanks terribleclio.

 

[Andi-B]

It's a pretty good lense for the price, I paid £100 for mine at Jessops in August last year, I take mine everywhere where the camera goes.

 

[Nigel]

I had one on my 350d. I was impressed with it for the money! I paid more than double you ahve but it was nearly a 2 years ago!

The only one on my photobucket:

 

[Clart]

wow thats cheap from jessops - its £160 on their website!

 

[duncansharp]

Yeah pretty good lenses, im well impressed with mine, one of my fav. shots:

 

[Andi-B]

^^ That close you can see your reflection in the eye of the cat



Was it licking it's lips too? :S

 

[ukaskew]

Great lens, I had the non-APO version and was very impressed, and I hear the APO one is quite a bit better.

 

[Billy]

Will this lens autofocus on the Nikon D40?

 

[unofficialPete]

Will this lens autofocus on the Nikon D40?

Not unless there is a HSM version..

 

[Billy]

Will this lens autofocus on the Nikon D40?

Not unless there is a HSM version..

Bugger

 

[terribleclio]

no hsm 70-300 but they've released a 18-200 os hsm now which can be had for around £150-200

 

[Clart]

JJ has one for sale for £250 i think. You'll be lucky to get it for £150

 

[Lagerlout]

£72? From a UK seller? Lucky bugger. Looks like a lot of lens for the money!

 

[terribleclio]

they are going for a touch over £200 on ebay from hongkong brand new. I also saw one go for £175 the other day

 

[Andi-B]

Will this lens autofocus on the Nikon D40?

Not unless there is a HSM version..

Bugger

Manual is better imo .. Gives you more control

 

[Rich]

I had the non APO version and it was not a bad lens for the money.

 

[JJ!]

JJ has one for sale for £250 i think. You'll be lucky to get it for £150

Its now been sold, but as Clart says... you will be lucky to get one for £150! Plus i cant see it getting shots like the ones already posted.

 

[terribleclio]

JJ has one for sale for £250 i think. You'll be lucky to get it for £150

Its now been sold, but as Clart says... you will be lucky to get one for £150! Plus i cant see it getting shots like the ones already posted.

why not? It has better optics than the 70-300. Should be a very very capable lens

 

[dick]

Not unless there is a HSM version..

Bugger

Manual is better imo .. Gives you more control

keep tellin yourself that,:approve:

 

[Andi-B]

^^ lol ..

I used to use a 35mm SLR camera without Auto Focus before my DSLR and used to manual focus all the time, my D40 has the AF switched off.

 

[Rasclart]

IMO 8/10 the Auto focus will be far more accurate and quicker than Manual. Not worth losing a REALLY good shot because you were busy fiddling being a real photographer with manual focus. Times move on. There are times when manual focus is needed but not that often

 

[Clart]

for a fast moving subject, manual focus is a pain in the ass.

 

[Andi-B]

IMO 8/10 the Auto focus will be far more accurate and quicker than Manual. Not worth losing a REALLY good shot because you were busy fiddling being a real photographer with manual focus. Times move on. There are times when manual focus is needed but not that often

for a fast moving subject, manual focus is a pain in the ass.

I took 2300 shots at world renault series in 2007 (over both saturday and sunday), 990 of those were the owners laps and 'winners' laps.

In total I deleted 600 out of the whole 2300 as they were either blur, too far away or wrong setting.. Not bad for manual work I'd say

 

[JJ!]

Its now been sold, but as Clart says... you will be lucky to get one for £150! Plus i cant see it getting shots like the ones already posted.

why not? It has better optics than the 70-300. Should be a very very capable lens

Its very poor in any light other than sunlight, its low light capabilities are way off the VR Nikon equivalents. Images are not very sharp, it struggles to auto focus, and even though I enjoyed using it, when I looked back at the images I took, the Nikon 55-200 VR pics were so much better.

I have switched back to a Nikon lens now, much happier with the results, and its a quicker lens, not by much mind. Also the Nikon is far better is low light, the VR works so much better than the Sigma OS.

This is just my experience, but my views are shared by a fair few members on flickr.

 

[Nigel]

I agree that some nikon lenses are much better, but I don't know of an equivalent lense to the Sigma for the same price that performs as well.

For the price, the limitations are far outweighed in my eyes.

 

[Rasclart]

for a fast moving subject, manual focus is a pain in the ass.

I took 2300 shots at world renault series in 2007 (over both saturday and sunday), 990 of those were the owners laps and 'winners' laps.

In total I deleted 600 out of the whole 2300 as they were either blur, too far away or wrong setting.. Not bad for manual work I'd say

Only would have deleted 100 if it was auto focus

I see your point but id rather focus on the subject at hand rather than worrying about it focussing.

 

[JJ!]

I agree that some nikon lenses are much better, but I don't know of an equivalent lense to the Sigma for the same price that performs as well.

For the price, the limitations are far outweighed in my eyes.

The 18-200 Nikon VR is a much better lens, and IMO is well worth the extra expense over the Sigma. Its costs around £120 more, but money that is well worth saving up for!!!

 

[Andi-B]

I took 2300 shots at world renault series in 2007 (over both saturday and sunday), 990 of those were the owners laps and 'winners' laps.

In total I deleted 600 out of the whole 2300 as they were either blur, too far away or wrong setting.. Not bad for manual work I'd say

Only would have deleted 100 if it was auto focus

I see your point but id rather focus on the subject at hand rather than worrying about it focussing.

Some people do find it easier to use AF, I don't begrudge anyone for using it, I personally don't though.

Personal choice tbh, everyones different :approve:

 

[Rasclart]

Defo mate

Wasnt having a go by the way I am from good with a camera LOL

 

[Andi-B]

Defo mate

Wasnt having a go by the way I am from good with a camera LOL

Yeah, I know, neither was I tbh, All good banter in a friendly argumentative environment lol

 

[Clart]

lens was delivered today, i'm not impressed. the focus ring is so notchy in manual focus, its practically unusable. bollox

 

[Lagerlout]

Thats a pisser ian. Common fault/feature with this lens, or you just got a bad one?

 

[Clart]

no idea mate? it works fine when auto focusing, but manual focus is impossible cos the focus ring is getting stuck on something. i think its goosed.

 

[ukaskew]

Sigma aren't known for great quality control, I would get it sent back tbh, shouldn't be like that. iirc the manual focus ring wasn't amazing but was certainly perfectly useable on my 70-300.

 

[Nigel]

I agree, send it back, manual focus on mine was quite smooth and definately useable!

 

[Rasclart]

Just contact Sigma sure they will swap it out