70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon ADVICE

Marea · Jan 16, 2009

Does anyone own this lens made by Sigma? I'm curious as to pros/vs cons.

selling price is only $210. Any advice would be great!

Here is the information on the lens provided from the sigma website

"these lenses incorporate a macro feature with maximum magnification 1:2 at the 300mm focal length. It is suitable for various types of shooting conditions.
The 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO for Nikon is a telephoto zoom lens with excellent value for money and optimized for use with digital SLR cameras.

This telephoto lens has a 1:2 maximum magnification at the 300mm focal length. It is ideal for portraits, sport and other types of photography. SLD (Special Low Dispersion) glass provides excellent correction of chromatic aberration. The super multi-layer coating reduces flare and ghosting. High image quality is assured throughout the entire zoom range."

dxqcanada · Jan 16, 2009

I would not suggest it.
Not sharp.

Is there a particular reason why this lens attracts your attention ?

Overread · Jan 16, 2009

Used one for the canon mount - for what you get for what you pay its a very good lens. Cheap with a lot of features to it, though its not really master of any.

I would urge you, though to spend a bit more and go for the APO version of the lens. The coatings on the lens give it an improved performance and it will deliver sharper results.

Myself I found that my lens worked best when mounted on a tripod and that usings its close focusing (macro) feature it worked well best as a macro flower lens (or for any other similar sized subject). For wildlife it was challenged as at the 300mm end it was softer and it lacked the quality to be used on distant subjects, though gave decent results when closer.

stsinner · Jan 16, 2009

I own the $79 version of that lens, and it's an excellent lens.. I took this picture of my daughter with that lens at 300mm.. Check the exif.. Tell me again how it's not sharp..

Also, that price is for the APO lens, because I bought the non-APO version for $79 brand new from 47st Photo.

dxqcanada · Jan 16, 2009

... selling @ $210.00 ? ... that sounds like the APO version.

The non-APO would sell for about $150.00

Marea · Jan 16, 2009

dxqcanada said:
I would not suggest it.
Not sharp.

Is there a particular reason why this lens attracts your attention ?

Well it seems like it offers a variety of functions that as a beginner I can take advantage of, namely the macro and telephoto zoom capabilities. Both of my other lenses are Nikor but I'm looking for another lens to add to the collection for a good price that I can enjoy experimenting with.

Currently I have a AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f3.5-5.6 and a AF NIKKOR 50mm f1.8D,

stsinner said:
I own the $79 version of that lens, and it's an excellent lens.. I took this picture of my daughter with that lens at 300mm.. Check the exif.. Tell me again how it's not sharp..

Also, that price is for the APO lens, because I bought the non-APO version for $79 brand new from 47st Photo.

Very crisp! Nice shot (love how her eyes just pop right off the page) This is exactly what I'm looking to be able to do with not too great of a cost involved for my next lens as my next BIG investment will be AF Zoom NIKKOR 80-400mm f4.5-5.6
$1,649.95* which you can see is a considerable investment. I want a new lens to play with for a lower cost till that time comes. (I'd also like a nice wide angle lens as well). I'm really hoping this lens can fill my macro needs (I bought a gorgeous AF-S VR Micro- NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED macro/micro lens for my beau that I'll be able to use occasionally to get my true macro fix - but I like that the lens mentioned above appears to fill more functions.

stsinner · Jan 16, 2009

Look, my Sigma lens took that picture, and I haven't touched it. It is crisp and sharp and beautiful, and aside from probably needing a stop or two to get the right eye in focus, st $79, I couldn't go wrong.. I got mine on eBay. I would gladly pay $150 for my lens.

I'd like someone to show me a sharper lens at 3X the price.. I love my Sigma lens.. I've heard of getting, "bad copies," but I guess I got a good one..

Go ahead and buy the Sigma.. I'll bet you won't be disappointed.

Just for show and tell, here's my Sigma non-APO lens that I paid under $100 for and took that picture with, and you can expect even better results from the APO version of this great lens:

kundalini · Jan 16, 2009

Marea said:
(I bought a gorgeous AF-S VR Micro- NIKKOR 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED macro/micro lens for my beau that I'll be able to use occasionally to get my true macro fix -

Problem solved on the macro (micro in Nikon talk).... next issue please.....

P.S. - Don't "settle".

Marea · Jan 16, 2009

kundalini said:
Problem solved on the macro (micro in Nikon talk).... next issue please.....

P.S. - Don't "settle".

LOL - I like the 'don't settle comment'...

Well - my macro/micro comment (I know that one word means both) was that the sexy/expensive VR Micro Nikkor 105mm was bought for my boyfriend as a gift (so naturally I don't want to be borrowing it every single time I go out to take shots so I will only have the high quality micro at my disposal some of the time. ) Thus my question is...

will the SIGMA lens fill limited micro needs when I don't have the Nikkor at my disposal?

Trust me, I'd like not to 'settle' but but but... the world is not made of money and I have a few other 'major purchases' for my camera bag that i'd like to focus the big bucks on (as stated in my original post).

stsinner · Jan 16, 2009

Marea said:
LOL - I like the 'don't settle comment'...

Well - my macro/micro comment (I know that one word means both) was that the sexy/expensive VR Micro Nikkor 105mm was bought for my boyfriend as a gift (so naturally I don't want to be borrowing it every single time I go out to take shots so I will only have the high quality micro at my disposal some of the time. ) Thus my question is...

will the SIGMA lens fill limited micro needs when I don't have the Nikkor at my disposal?

Trust me, I'd like not to 'settle' but but but... the world is not made of money and I have a few other 'major purchases' for my camera bag that i'd like to focus the big bucks on (as stated in my original post).

My Sigma has a Macro switch..

Marea · Jan 17, 2009

stsinner said:
My Sigma has a Macro switch..

from the shots that you've shared - it looks like the lens might just do the trick for me!

Thanks for sharing

Overread · Jan 17, 2009

The macro on the sigma is not true macro - a flower head it will get into a whole frame and insect it won't - here some examples:
full shot:

crop from the shot:

I should point out that one worked very well - detail in the macro areas is tricky to get and you need very good lighting/flash.

As for quality - since your after telephoto range you might find it lacking - shorter focal ranges it is not too soft, but out at 300mm it does sofen - the APO edition might be good enough, but I have not tried that lens, though online examples show that it does give a noticable improvement over the older version.

doenoe · Jan 17, 2009

I got the APO version and im pretty happy with it. Like Overread just said, it does go softer at 300mm. And the macro isnt true macro. You can get nice pics of the bigger bugs (like butterflies for instance). You still need to crop and it isnt as sharp as a true macro lens. I also crop with the macro lens, but in the end its still sharper then the 70-300. But overall, its a great lens if you consider what it costs. Like all things in photography, you get what you pay for, but this lens is still a pretty good bang for your buck.

Marea · Jan 18, 2009

Overread said:
The macro on the sigma is not true macro - a flower head it will get into a whole frame and insect it won't - here some examples:
full shot:

crop from...

I should point out that one worked very well - detail in the macro areas is tricky to get and you need very good lighting/flash.

As for quality - since your after telephoto range you might find it lacking - shorter focal ranges it is not too soft, but out at 300mm it does sofen - the APO edition might be good enough, but I have not tried that lens, though online examples show that it does give a noticable improvement over the older version.

Thank you for sharing. I think for it's purpose this lens is looking like it might work for me. I liked your flower shot and it's far better than I can do with the glass I currently have. I appreciate the advice. thanks!

doenoe said:
I got the APO version and im pretty happy with it. Like Overread just said, it does go softer at 300mm. And the macro isnt true macro. You can get nice pics of the bigger bugs (like butterflies for instance). You still need to crop and it isnt as sharp as a true macro lens. I also crop with the macro lens, but in the end its still sharper then the 70-300. But overall, its a great lens if you consider what it costs. Like all things in photography, you get what you pay for, but this lens is still a pretty good bang for your buck.

Why isn't the Macro 'true macro'? Just curious. I hear what you're saying about you get what you pay for. I guess the affirmation I'm looking for is that it still does the trick even though it's not 'great quality'.

Thanks for sharing your opinions.