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

doenoe · Jan 18, 2009

Well macro has a 1:1 ratio (or larger), when it comes to magnification. So the image of the object that is projected on the sensor or film, is the same size as the subject itself.
The Sigma you are talking about has a 1:2 ratio. So the image projected is half the size of the real subject. Hope this makes sense

Marea · Jan 18, 2009

Claff said:
Works for me but I'm quite the cheapskate. I could spend more money on a lens but I didn't and have no regrets.

Was the above car pic taken with the lens? If yes I'm getting it ASAP

I like your sig by the way...
Thanks for the advice. Cheers!

doenoe said:
Well macro has a 1:1 ratio (or larger), when it comes to magnification. So the image of the object that is projected on the sensor or film, is the same size as the subject itself.
The Sigma you are talking about has a 1:2 ratio. So the image projected is half the size of the real subject. Hope this makes sense

That does make sense! Thank you for helping me understand that concept. :thumbup::thumbup: !

Garbz · Jan 18, 2009

Just to let you know when you downscale a 10 megapixel image to that size even a picture taken through a coke bottle looks sharp.

To quantify the sharpness complaint about this lens: Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro - Test Report / Review

The photozone graphs show that this is an excellent and very capable lens at 70mm, but it's quality falls off quickly. The only real problem is at 300mm where the sharpness in the centre is strill excellent, but the sharpness at the border is horrible for want of a better word. Bear that in mind if you are printing very large images, or cropping down images anywhere but around the centre of the frame.

Claff, being a cheapskate shouldn't prevent you from cleaning your sensor

NateS · Jan 18, 2009

This image is really worth the money. There's a thread on here somewhere with pictures of every kind with this lens if you do a quick search. I remember starting the thread maybe 6 months ago.

Stopped down this lens is plenty sharp. If shooting outside, it's not hard to get f/8 in decent light and shooting in macro you'll wantn f/12 with flash often times for increased DOF. This lens is very sharp at f/12

Here's a few of my samples with the APO version of this lens.

So for those who want to say nothing more than "I wouldn't, it's not a sharp lens", maybe you should be more specific as to not sound like you don't know what you're talking about because I have gotten a ton of really sharp images with this lens.

Marea · Jan 19, 2009

Garbz said:
Just to let you know when you downscale a 10 megapixel image to that size even a picture taken through a coke bottle looks sharp.

To quantify the sharpness complaint about this lens: Sigma AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG macro - Test Report / Review

Thanks Garbz... appreciate the effort and knowledge you're sharing with me!

NateS said:
This image is really worth the money. There's a thread on here somewhere with pictures of every kind with this lens if you do a quick search. I remember starting the thread maybe 6 months ago.

Stopped down this lens is plenty sharp. If shooting outside, it's not hard to get f/8 in decent light and shooting in macro you'll wantn f/12 with flash often times for increased DOF. This lens is very sharp at f/12

So for those who want to say nothing more than "I wouldn't, it's not a sharp lens", maybe you should be more specific as to not sound like you don't know what you're talking about because I have gotten a ton of really sharp images with this lens.

Thank you for sharing your gorgeous images NateS! I'm not really looking for this lens to be everything for me (I have a couple others) so I think for the price it's looking like it can fill my desire to experiment with macro shots. I love the shots of the moth and praying mantis! Cool (I know they're good shots if they give me goosebumps and make me go ... ICKY! as I'm squeeeeeeemish around bugs) ha ha :lmao: