Nikon D40 Replacement Lens

Robstar1619 · Mar 3, 2008

Hey guys! I need a new lens for my Nikon D40 and wonder if this lens is any good?
SIGMA 70-300mm DG MOTORIZED Lens.

sabbath999 · Mar 3, 2008

JerryPH said:
I own this lens, and discuss it often. It is without doubt the best and most versatile lens on the market for Nikons. Many here have PROVEN that it does come close to being the equal of the vaunted 70-200VR F/2.8(which I also own), under certain conditions.

I own both the 18-200 VR and the 70-200 VR you mentioned.

The ONLY thing about the 18-200 VR that you could possibly say is "close to being equal to the vaunted 70-200VR F/2.8" is that the VR works as good.

In every single other way it is completely, entirely and utterly inferior when it comes to image quality, in every situation, when you are talking about pictures in the 70-200mm range... not to mention the fact that it is completely inferior in build quality as well.

Of course, it covers more than twice the range and costs about a third of what the 70-200 does... so this shouldn't be a surprise to anybody.

passerby · Mar 4, 2008

sabbath999 said:
In every single other way it is completely, entirely and utterly inferior when it comes to image quality, in every situation, when you are talking about pictures in the 70-200mm range... not to mention the fact that it is completely inferior in build quality as well.

I believe you. Is it possible if you post few sample pictures from both lens using different focal length and different apperture if possible to see how much is their differences in their IQ? What I mean is - does it really produce dissapointing pictures for the pixel peepers or for the layman as well?

emmaf · Mar 5, 2008

Mike_E said:
If I could only have one AF-S lens under $350 (I'm guessing that you don't really want to spend very much) I would go with the 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. You can find these used for $200 and up on e-bay.

This lens is one of the all time great consumer lenses, imho.

OK - after reading all the posts (Thank You!),
For less than $300 - would the AF-S lens 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. be better than the 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 with the VR?

Antithesis · Mar 5, 2008

emmaf said:
OK - after reading all the posts (Thank You!),
For less than $300 - would the AF-S lens 18-70mm f3.5-4.5. be better than the 18-55mm f3.5-5.6 with the VR?

I've read many flattering reviews on the 18-70, and will probably be picking one up as my mid-range zoom soon enough. VR can be extremely useful, but I'd say go with the 18-70 because of its sterling reputation.

shivaswrath · Mar 5, 2008

i went with the 18-55 VR since it was a lot cheaper and if anything happens to it, I won't be torn up. . .

I do plan on getting a f/2.8 midrange as well for some of those sharper shots, and the 18-50 f/2.8 by Sigma fits the bill. . .

since you're looking at an 18-70, have you considered the 16-85 VRII that just came out? might be the best compromise. . .price is up there though. . .

Tasmaster · Mar 5, 2008

If you are going to be taking handheld pictures indoors or in low light (or if your pictures often look blurry because the camera moved), a VR lens will be better for you. If you value the longer zoom over that, take the longer lens.

Personally i would say go for the 18-55 VR. It might look and feel cheaper, but in my opinion you will get a lot more out of it if VR is half as good as everyone says it is, and 70mm is not that big a difference over 55mm for me to offset the VR advantage.

sabbath999 · Mar 5, 2008

passerby said:
I believe you. Is it possible if you post few sample pictures from both lens using different focal length and different apperture if possible to see how much is their differences in their IQ? What I mean is - does it really produce dissapointing pictures for the pixel peepers or for the layman as well?

I say this with all due respect... I don't mean to sound like a jerk or a grouch, and I hope I am not coming off that way... but... frankly, I would rather spend my limited shooting time taking actual pictures than shooting a lens test.

I don't mean to sound cranky, but I've already told the forum what I know about the lenses. It shouldn't be surprising at all that a consumer grade lens with a lot of optical compromises is not nearly as good as a pro grade lens that has a much more "reasonable" zoom range for quality's sake, and that costs 3 times as much.

I have no idea what would disappoint pixel peepers or laymen, we have taken some really good pictures with the 18-200. My wife is a good photographer, and she really likes it. Me? You have seen my work, so you can determine whether you think I am worth listening to... I would vastly prefer the 18-55 VR and 55-200 VR combo for half the price of the 18-200 VR, because that combo will give you a lot better image quality for just a bit more hassle. The whole idea of getting a DSLR is so you can actually use interchangeable lenses.

Just my humble opinion.

rmh159 · Mar 6, 2008

I got the Tamron 17 - 50 2.8 to replace my kit lens and love it. I'll admit I don't have as sharp of an eye as others with more experience but I wanted to go with a tighter zoom range (I've heard that the higher zoom range lenses offer convenience at the price of quality which I wanted to avoid) and the F2.8. On a side note if those with more experience have opinions on the Tamron 17 - 50 2.8 I'd be interested in hearing them.

My advice would be to figure out where your needs might be in a few years and buy towards that rather than spending less and getting something to hold you over.

Tasmaster · Mar 6, 2008

rmh159 said:
My advice would be to figure out where your needs might be in a few years and buy towards that rather than spending less and getting something to hold you over.

This advice works for some people. There is also the opposite school of thought: Buy what you are going to use now. Although i certainly appreciate quality gear and the difference it makes, planning too far ahead can work against a beginner in some cases. If you like photography (or any other hobby) and you want to get more involved, the best gear is often the gear that will allow you to dive into it right now and with the least amount of worries.

That can mean don't buy a $5k lens that you will be scared to even touch, much less throw in a backpack, but don't buy cheap stuff that will break down either. A little research before you buy goes a long way, not everyone does it but if you do, so much the better for you.

Just some advice from me presenting another view, i don't know what works for you or everyone else.