Battle of the Macro-Telephotos (a side-by-side comparison)

Discussion in 'Beyond the Basics' started by jpenna, Jul 7, 2008.

  1. jpenna

    jpenna TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I recently bought a Sigma 70-300mm Macro Telephoto Lens:
    [​IMG]

    ...and now I got a Nikon Vivitar Series 1 70-210mm Macro Focusing Telephoto Lens to compare them side-by-side:
    [​IMG]

    At the end, only one can survive -- the other is off to eBay.



    --The specs--

    Focal Ranges
    Sigma: 70-300mm :)
    Nikon: 70-210mm

    Aperture
    Sigma: f/4-5.6
    Nikon: f/3.5 :)

    Magnification Ratio Thingamabob
    Sigma: 1:2 at 300mm (for comparison, 1:2.9 at 210mm) :)
    Nikon: 1:3.5

    Weight
    Sigma: 19 oz :)
    Nikon: at least 7 tons (but closer to 30 oz)



    --Nikon "Yay"s--
    The Vivitar is a LOT sturdier than the Sigma. I'm pretty sure it's build out of pure lead and uses plutonium for the glass. I'm convinced could roundhouse kick this thing onto oncoming traffic and it wouldn't break.
    It's also a faster lens than the Sigma. Considerably faster at the max focal length (over 2 stops).

    --Nikon "Aww"s--
    Biggest aww about the Vivitar is that it doesn't do anything automatically with my CVS Powerflash. No autofocusing, no aperture control; therefore, it only works in Manual mode. Not-so-bad when you're working in a controlled environment, but very annoying when you would rather be on Aperture Priority and can't necessarily mess around with different shutter speeds.

    Second biggest aww about the Vivitar is the magnification ratio thingamabob. See pictures below to see what I'm talking about.


    --Test Pictures--
    Nothing too fancy, just a few test shots...

    Nikon at 210mm f/3.5:
    [​IMG]

    Sigma at 210 f/5.6:
    [​IMG]

    ...but because of the bigger focal range and smaller magnification ratio thingamabob, I can get a lot closer with the Sigma (here, at 300mm f/5.6):
    [​IMG]

    Nikon at 210mm:
    [​IMG]

    Sigma at 210mm:
    [​IMG]

    Again, Sigma at 300mm:
    [​IMG]


    Nikon's bokeh:
    [​IMG]

    Sigma's bokeh:
    [​IMG]



    Possibly the ugliest photo I've ever taken...

    ...with the Nikon at 70mm:
    [​IMG]

    ...with the Sigma at 70mm:
    [​IMG]


    Therefore, even though I like the colors on the Nikon better, I believe that the Sigma wins! It's a beast at autofocusing, it does macros a whole lot better, it has a better focal range, it's newer...

    Don't get me wrong, the Nikon Vivitar is still an awesome lens -- but the Sigma's better IMHO.

    C&C's?
     
    Last edited: Jul 7, 2008
  2. Bifurcator

    Bifurcator TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2008
    Messages:
    3,312
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Japan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Based on the images and comments I agree with your conclusions. The little bit of difference in optical quality between the two can be compensated for in post very easily but the 300mm macro ability of the sigma can't. Nor the AF.
     
  3. chris

    chris TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Scotland
    Stop messing about, sell them both and get a decent Nikkor.
     
  4. jpenna

    jpenna TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Not everyone's rich like Chris.
     
  5. chris

    chris TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2003
    Messages:
    271
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    Scotland
    You don't have to be particularly rich - look around on ebay etc. You can connect very nearly any Nikkor lens made for an SLR or DSLR to the modern range of camera bodies - sometimes you miss out on some features but there are excellent bargains to be had.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

sigma telephotos for nikon