sigma 28-300

[puyjapin]

Sigma 28-300mm f 3 5-6 3 DG MACRO

has anyone any experience of this lens. Looks like is does it all?? also if it goes to 28mm wide angle would this be wider than my 18-55 mm kit lens as it states wide angle. Or should i just avoid lenses like this?

 

[JerryPH]

You *know* any lens that does it all, does it poorly everywhere. It says macro, but its not a 1:1 macro, but a 3:1 macro. It is also VERY slow and the optics will be mediocre at best. It is one huge kit lens... lol

I would not go near a lens like this if I was a serious photographer.

 

[LuckySo-n-So]

Thank goodness I'm not a serious photographer yet...

However, that being said, I have the Sigma 70-300 and it is pretty mediocre--esp. past 200mm. For under $150, it's a great lens, but it is pretty soft throughout much of the focal range. The casual observer won't be able to notice as much, but people with experience, like Jerry, can spot it in an instant.

I'm sticking with mine for now, as I can't stomach the thought of giving up the $1700 for the Nikon 28-200mm f/2.8

Nikon also makes a 70-300 f/4.5-5.6, but I don't know if it's $400-500 better. Whatever the case, you'll still want the f/2.8 at the end of the day.

I enjoy my Sigma 70-300, but I understand its limitations(my friends marvel at the fact that I can take a picture of a coke can @ 50 feet and then zoom the display so you can read the ingredients!). I also don't know how it stacks up to the 28-300. Looks like you lose some aperture at the 300mm focal length.

As I've learned quickly in photography you have to ask yourself this question: Can you be happy with the Chevy Malibu, when all the cool/rich kids have the Corvette?

 

[puyjapin]

how abt the 70-300 vr lens made by nikon ?

 

[JerryPH]

Only slightly better... but not by much.

 

[puyjapin]

so no major advantage witht the VR over say the sigma APO which is half the price?