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

"W Chan" wrote in message
news:USlLc.75056$ek5.8230@pd7tw2no...

Hi
I have a Nikon D70 and F401s...
I am comparing the above 3 lens... and like to hear other users'
opinions...

I have the D70 & got a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G - as I understand it the G
and ED version in this lens are pretty much the same, performance wise. The
lense is slow to AF, hunts a bit, but in bright light works just great. If
you're saving up for a much better zoom, the G @ $100 or so will tide you
over just fine for a while. That's why I got it
It's also very light weight, which means you can toss it in the bag and
carry it everywhere. Basically a good, cheap zoom you can bring with you.
I'd get it again. Just don't expect it to outperform a $300-$600 zoom and
you'll be happy with it.

"John S" wrote in message
...

"W Chan" wrote in message
news:USlLc.75056$ek5.8230@pd7tw2no...

Hi
I have a Nikon D70 and F401s...
I am comparing the above 3 lens... and like to hear other users'
opinions...

I have the D70 & got a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G - as I understand it the G
and ED version in this lens are pretty much the same, performance wise.
The
lense is slow to AF, hunts a bit, but in bright light works just great. If
you're saving up for a much better zoom, the G @ $100 or so will tide you
over just fine for a while. That's why I got it
It's also very light weight, which means you can toss it in the bag and
carry it everywhere. Basically a good, cheap zoom you can bring with you.
I'd get it again. Just don't expect it to outperform a $300-$600 zoom and
you'll be happy with it.



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

"John S" wrote in message
...

"W Chan" wrote in message
news:USlLc.75056$ek5.8230@pd7tw2no...

Hi
I have a Nikon D70 and F401s...
I am comparing the above 3 lens... and like to hear other users'
opinions...

I have the D70 & got a Nikon 70-300mm f/4-5.6 G - as I understand it the G
and ED version in this lens are pretty much the same, performance wise.
The
lense is slow to AF, hunts a bit, but in bright light works just great. If
you're saving up for a much better zoom, the G @ $100 or so will tide you
over just fine for a while. That's why I got it
It's also very light weight, which means you can toss it in the bag and
carry it everywhere. Basically a good, cheap zoom you can bring with you.
I'd get it again. Just don't expect it to outperform a $300-$600 zoom and
you'll be happy with it.



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

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

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

"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

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