If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
Hi I have a Nikon D70 and F401s... I am comparing the above 3 lens... and like to hear other users' opinions... cheers. will -- * * * To reply, please email to This is a security measure to reduce spams and unsolicited junk mails. Cheers. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
"Mark Kovalcson" wrote in message ... I have the Nikon 70-300 G lens, and was quite disappointed in its slow focussing and soft image at wide apertures. It now lives in the back of the cupboard until I need a lightweight lens with the range. The lens I lug about with me is a Sigma EX 70-200 f2.8 APO. I love the lens, and have the arm muscles to prove it :-) As the previous poster says, don't expect too much from an inexpensive lens. Dennis That is quite a price range and unfortunately none of these lenses focus really quickly. ~$100 Nikon 70-300 G ~$200 Sigma 70-300 ~$300 Nikon 70-300 ED ~$700 Sigma 70-200 f2.8 Now if you really want sharp at f2.8, fast and accurate the ~$1400 Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR is the best lens out there for that range. Using 300mm on a D70 puts you at 450mm equivalent which is very hard to hand hold to get a clean shot without a high shutter speed. In a Canon lineup there is a more selection among the fast focusing sharp lenses. I'd have a 70-200 f4L in a heartbeat. It is very sharp even at f4 and fast focusing lens with a reasonably size and weight, half that of the Sigma 70-200 $550 70-200 f4 L $1000 70-200 f2.8 $1400 70-200 f2.8 IS Thanks Mark That is a grand job you have done of listing the available range. Had cost been no object, I would have gone for the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR and I had been considering the Nikon 70-300 ED. In the end I decided on the Sigma 70-200 2.8, and have been very happy with it in all respects. Dennis |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
"Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message ... In article , D.R. DR@NewZealand wrote: "Randall Ainsworth" wrote in message news:200720042253412886% SNIP It's all made together to work together...Nikon. Load o' Crap! You will get better results using a Nikon lens with a Nikon camera than you will using a 3rd party lens. Preddy will be pleased as it seems Sigma kicks butt here. The sting of low quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten. I am sure that the sting of soft photos from buying a Nikon ED lens with such a low quality glass will smite even more, seeing that they cost a premium and that the Sigma equivalent is cheaper and better in this particular case. Compare for example the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 XR DI for about US$585. Slightly sharper than the Nikon 28-70 ED equivalent at US$2700. 4.14 vs 4.05 out of 5. You can be a snob all you like and try to convince yourself that you are better off having bought the Nikon ED at almost 5 times the price of the Tamron lens. Whereas others not so snobby can enjoy the quality at about 1/5 of the price. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
"D.R." DR@NewZealand wrote in message ... "Thomas" wrote in message ... Preddy will be pleased as it seems Sigma kicks butt here. Check out: http://www.photozone.de/2Equipment/easytxt.htm For Optical quality: 3.21 out of 5 = Sigma 70-300mm. Macro Super II APO How do I know is this lens? It Just says APO Macro on the Barrel and it has a gold band around the front. Mine is the non-APO and it has no APO written anywhere to be seen on packaging or the lens itself. If the one you are looking at says "APO" then it will be. Some images taken with my lens (all except the third image): http://radel.inet.net.nz/photography/people.html and: http://radel.inet.net.nz/photography/macro.html Scanned with a cheapie scanner. I am no "photographer" as such, and I risk humiliation by Mr Ainsworth for even showing these here. But here you go. You can get much sharper lenses than this, but more $$$$$.... D.R. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
Thanks Mark
That is a grand job you have done of listing the available range. Had cost been no object, I would have gone for the Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR and I had been considering the Nikon 70-300 ED. In the end I decided on the Sigma 70-200 2.8, and have been very happy with it in all respects. Dennis I've heard good things about the Sigma 70-200 f2.8, but my understanding is that you need to stop it down to f4 before it is sharp and it is slow to focus. Still many are a fan of that lens. This site has some reasonable reviews of lenses by lens owners. http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/ Here is a good link for Canon lens reviews. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...n_lenses.shtml |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro
In rec.photo.equipment.35mm D.R. DR@newzealand wrote:
I am sure that the sting of soft photos from buying a Nikon ED lens with such a low quality glass will smite even more, seeing that they cost a premium and that the Sigma equivalent is cheaper and better in this particular case. Compare for example the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 XR DI for about US$585. Slightly sharper than the Nikon 28-70 ED equivalent at US$2700. 4.14 vs 4.05 out of 5. You can be a snob all you like and try to convince yourself that you are better off having bought the Nikon ED at almost 5 times the price of the Tamron lens. Whereas others not so snobby can enjoy the quality at about 1/5 of the price. OTOH you can be sure it doesn't start to stick at infinity focus after a week or be very unsharp thoughout 1/2 of teh focus range or simply fall apart - stuff i saw back when i still considered tamron an option. -- Sander +++ Out of cheese error +++ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | Thomas | Digital Photography | 17 | July 25th 04 12:06 AM |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | Randall Ainsworth | 35mm Photo Equipment | 4 | July 25th 04 12:06 AM |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | John S | 35mm Photo Equipment | 6 | July 22nd 04 02:07 AM |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | D.R. | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | July 21st 04 11:30 PM |
Lens advice: Tamron 70-300 f/ 4-5.6 vs. Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6D ED vs. Sigma 70-300mm. Supra II Macro | Thomas | 35mm Photo Equipment | 2 | July 21st 04 04:04 PM |