Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DL Macro Super

I have purchased this lens for it price and capabilities. It is light and easy to use both auto and manual mode. If I had known then, what I know about it now, I would not had bought this lens. The quality is just not there. Just out side of the warranty the lens broke, every time I turn the camera on it shakes and vibrates for a second or two. I do not think that is good for my camera, so I stopped using it. I think it was an expensive lesson. I know that I will not but nor will recommend any "SIGMA" products to any friends nor my enemies.

none

in action shots it is slow to focus in auto mode.

no

Friendly but useless.

soft at 300mm gets a bit sharper at shorter focal lengths. not much to say about this lens as its the bottom line for zoom lenses. maybe comparable to sony 75-300mm still softer then that one.


only positive things i can say is. still usable as a every day zoom lens without worrying about damaging it. its ok as long as ur not too demanding

got mine for $10 so pretty much it was a great deal. even brand new price on the net is around $150-200 which is great value.

price

soft at most focal lengths

very long focus ring needs a huge angle to reach from one end to the other of the
focus

focus ring not dampened somewhat tricky action

tokina 28-210mm

www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses

Consumer Sigma lenses aren't the best lenses on the market at any price, and I have churned through a lot of different brands looking for happiness at various price ranges. However, I keep being tempted back to sigma for the unbeatable value for money they generally offer.

Up until recently, I thought this particular lens was the sharpest zoom I owned.

Many of the prints I have taken (moderate enlargement) have been generally stunning; and this was often with fuji 400 consumer film. The autofocus is acceptable for a zoom of this price range (on Pentax body), but ideally a tripod needs to be used in all but the brightest light for the latter half of the zoom range. It does hunt in low light.

Some other reviewers have stated that sharpeness is poor. I feel that they either have a patchy unit or are not using a tripod enough (and Sigma do have lemons - I recently got rid of a short sigma zoom that had the most unacceptable flare of any lens I've used - yet other reviewers have commented on great flare control with this lens..?.).

I find sharpness more than acceptable right through the range, with perhaps some softening at the long end; but still not bad. That said, I rarely ever shoot wide open with this lens; I nearly always stop down to at least f.6.7-f8.0 to hit the sweet spot. If you need to shoot mainly wide open, this lens may not suit you.

I mainly use the 70-200mm zone for taking people shots, at which point the shots are usually very good. I can't comment on distortion as it is not that important with the type of photos I take.

I bought this lens dirt cheap and as a result would have been satisfied with adequate performance. I have been consistently surprised, however, by the balanced and saturated colors, superb contrast and pleasing bokeh achieved with this lens.

Back to my initial comment; "Up until recently, I thought this particular lens was the sharpest zoom I owned...".

I recently performed resolution tests on all the lenses I owned to simplify my collection (test: samples of different sized print next to a pitted marble urn. A section was backlit slighty to add a potential flare factor - different focal lengths and aperatures were tested). Result: Much to my astonishment, this lens turned out to be slightly LESS sharp than ALL the other lenses (flare was well controlled though).

My conclusion:
To me it seems that there is more to perceived or subjective sharpness than just the optical sharpness of the lens. I suspect that the relatively outstanding contrast, color saturation and balance of this lens combines to define edges better, thus compensating for relatively slight deficits in absolute optical sharpness (I suppose much like unsharp mask with digital).

Nevertheless, after 2 years I am still absolutely stoked with the performance of this lens. I choose to judge its worth purely by the many superb (even "wow") images it has produced for me. On this basis I feel there is no other tele-zoom that offers so much for so little money.

- Cheap, great value
- Superb contrast
- Great color balance and saturation
- Macro is OK, handy feature
- Sharp enough

- Autofocus can hunt a bit in low light (minor criticism considering the price)
- Will not close autofocus in Macro mode (needs nearly a metre from the subject)

Sigma 28-80mm
Sigma 24-70mm HF
Sigma 24-135mm f2.8-4.5
Pentax FA 28-105mm f3.2-4.5
Pentax FA 50mm f1.7
Pentax M 50mm f1.7

Haven't used, though I believe quite good in Australia

I have been using this lens on my D70 for about a year and the best way to describe its performance is disappointing. I bought this lens because I needed a long zoom for a family vacation quickly and it was cheap and readily available. I really should have known better. At 70mm this lens has about 1/2 the sharpness of my Nikon AF-S 18-70mm 1:3.5-4.5G ED kit lens that came with the D70. Shooting with this lens is like shooting with a very sharp lens with a softening filter. If you never print photos bigger then about 4x6 (using the full frame) this really isn't a problem. But even at 8x12, the softness really shows. If you do any cropping of the photo, the problem is even worse. On animal photos where I am accustomed to seeing individual hairs in a photo, with this lens all I get is a soft blur. Perhaps at this price I shouldn't complain, but the image quality of this lens just isn't up to par for modern optics; at any price. The problem with buying a lens like this, is that once it's in your bag you'll use it, and you'll lose great photos because your equipment wasn't up to the task. My advice for this lens is to save your money and spring for a Nikon 70-300 f/4-5.6. You'll get a sharper lens and a lot less headaches.

Inexpensive.

Soft at all focal lengths Very soft beyond 200mm

Nikon 70-300 F/4-5.6

N/A

Bought this lens because I couldn't conceive life without a long lens. I found it worked fine with my Nikon F80. Sure, it hunts a lot, but it works well under strong lighting; the build is a bit cheap, but then, it's an inexpensive lens; sharpness isn't there all the time, but it's achievable. In sum, a good lens for the money.

I really liked the macro. Also, filter size is convenient (58ø) for use with diopters. The mount is metal and the lens itself, though plastic, is not too heavy.

Slooooooooow. Both, at focusing and in terms of light. Gave up using it with ISO 100 film. Heck, I gave up using it with 400! If it's not ISO 800 stuff, forget about handholding the camera.

Vivitar 75-300 manual focus for Minolta, even slower.

Good! I dropped the lens and they fixed it for $50 (it was about one year old).