Sigma or Nikon(Nikkor?) Lense...

[FemFugler]

So i know i made a thread a while back about lenses but i have another queston.

So i went into a camera store a few days ago and while i was in there i decided to ask what lense the guy recommended for shooting wildlife shots. He suggested a sigma 70 - 300 something something i dont remember the full details what he said i just remember he said it had the vr(but called something different but does the same thing) like the nikon lenses do.

He said Sigma was probably a better make than both Canon and Nikon put together is that correct? It's going to be a $600 lense so i just want to make sure this is the one i want before i shell out the money, which i know probably isn't that much compared to what many others spend on lenses but for a student still in school, it's a fairly large chunk of money to be dishing out on thing!

While i was looking at a few other camera stores online i was looking into the sigma i came across that there are three different(maybe more) 70 - 300 lenses. Now i'm assuming it's this one as the price is closest to around $600 but just to double check does this seem right?

Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG OS : Broadway Camera!, Your Specialty Camera Store in Vancouver BC, Canada

There's also:

Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro With Motor Driver : Broadway Camera!, Your Specialty Camera Store in Vancouver BC, Canada

and

Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG Macro With Motor Driver : Broadway Camera!, Your Specialty Camera Store in Vancouver BC, Canada


And then i was looking at the nikon lenses and the price isn't that different to be honest...

70-300mm f4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor : Broadway Camera!, Your Specialty Camera Store in Vancouver BC, Canada

Ok so my questions are,

Do you agree with the guys suggestion of the 70 - 300 sigma lense?

Do you think Sigma is better(i know this is probably a personal preferense hopefully no wars over this one) than the Nikon lenses? Which would you reccomend to go for?

Any other suggestions

Oh yea and i have Nikon D3000 i geuss i shoud have said that at the beginning...

 

[IgsEMT]

It is a first time I hear that a 3rd party lens is better then either Nikon or Canon. Yes, with brands you are also paying for a name but you're also paying for quality. There are people who'll swear by 3rd party gear but as said, I never heard it being better.
Final product (film or digital), is a combination of various factors like photographer, gear, and post processing, thus it isn't only about a lens.
One great advantage of 3rd party gear is the price - at least 50% less then brand names . However, if you ever want to resell it, it also drops in value quicker.

Good Luck

 

[AtlPikMan]

I own a few third party lenses(Tamron, Tokina) and while they are sharp and produce great color i don't think they are better than Nikon Brand Glass. I think with third party glass get it at a better price but, you give up Build quality and some image quality, for me thats not a bad thing, Im not a pro.

I think the "Sales Man" was doing his job trying to make a sell. Is the Sigma 70-300 a good Wild Life lens, Maybe...Is it better than the Nikon 70-300 I dont think so, Its probably not better than Canon.

Read some of these Reviews...

Nikon 70-300 vr Nikon | AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED | 2161

Sigma 70-300 Sigma | 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG Macro Autofocus Lens | 5A8306

Sample Pics

Nikon NikonCafe.com

Sigma APO Version NikonCafe.com

 

[Overread]

Those prices for the sigma lenses sound very high:
Amazon.com: Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Motorized Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras: Electronics

Essentially they are all models of the same lens - however the DG OS edition I was not aware of. I know that of the other two sigma makes the APO edition is the noticably sharper lens - whilst with the OS edition I have little to no understanding save that it has optical stabalization (a good thing in a telephoto lens) but on the image quality side I have less idea of its market position; further its cost will be more than the others just because it has OS installed so its price might not be a total reflection of its overall image quality.

If given the choice I would say the Nikon 70-300mm would be the lens I would pick and I would honestly expect little overall optical difference between the sigma OS and the nikon. The other editions of the lens are more budget line and they only offer a close focusing setup (around half life size, 1:2 magnification) which is good for getting some macro experience in larger subjects like butterflies and flowers.

 

[Shockey]

First of all clerks at camera stores, should not be considered experts on camera equipment. There may be some that are but most are far from it.
No way should he make a blanket statement that Sigma is better than Nikon, that really shows he does not know his stuff.
The Nikon 70-300 is generally considered a pretty good lens. If you can get by without the zoom look at the 300 F4 which is generally considered one of the best lenses you can get for the money.
300mm is pretty short for wildlife photography by the way.

 

[FemFugler]

So basically you're saying that Nikon is better than Sigma? So i should be going for a Nikon then? What lense for wild life can you guys recommend then? Should i stick with the 70-300 one, but by Nikon? Or is there another one that would be better? Thanks in advanced.

 

[Joves]

I agree with Shockey that 300 is a little short. I use the 80-400 and a lot of times that is short as well. For a while I was using the Tamron 28-300 and, it was OK till I got my 80-400. I have heard good things about the Nikon lens but, havent personally shot with it. I know I love my Tamron which they now make it with image stabilization as well. I think it is less expensive that either or those. The draw back with it is as I believe with the Sigma is they are much slower on focus. Also the Tamrom doesnt really start getting sharp till f/8 and up.

 

[FemFugler]

So for a beginner photographer, what lense would you recommend for shooting wildlife shots?

Do you think the 80 - 400 would be fine for a beginner?

Do they make 80 - 400 vr for Nikon? (sorry if that's a dumb question) Or i geuss i could look into that on my own.

Thanks