Any thoughts on this lens?

james450d

james450d

Suspended / Banned
Messages
119
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
Ive got the sigma 70-300 its not a bad lens, cheap and cheerful and all that. If you can steady yourself it is alright.

Heres a couple of pics i took this morning, im far from being an expert etc but to give you an idea of what the lens is capable of when being used by Mr Shaky Hands (me)

Tit.jpg


Swan-1.jpg


Both hand held a max length.
 
I have a sigma 70-300 for sale.

Check out the sales thread. Its a sharp copy and well worth the money in my opinion.

Just returned from a holiday in goa where I got some great shots.

If you look at my flickr page the shots of the animls are taken with this lens when I first got it. Didnt really know what I was doing re shutter speeds and focal lengthsand they still came out pretty good.

Flickr is gregpc1
 
I like the idea of all of one lens covering the whole range from 28-300 so i dont have to keep swapping lenses. Just not entirely sure on the quality?

The 55-250 IS was also on my possibly list but read some pretty average review on this lens.

Greg - I will look at your flickr page when i get home!
 
james450d said:
I like the idea of all of one lens covering the whole range from 28-300 so i dont have to keep swapping lenses. Just not entirely sure on the quality?
Click to expand...
The lenses you currently have will outshine the 28-300 by a long way.

The 55-250 IS was also on my possibly list but read some pretty average review on this lens.
Click to expand...
From what I have seen and read this lens is amazing value for money - so much so that I have contemplated buying one for the days when I don't want to lug a heavy zoom.
 
If you want a little more reach and you're looking at a 300mm lens, for the price try the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG lens. Costs about £150 now (got mine for £129) but it really is very, very sharp - can send you some sample shots I took on my 40D. It also has a 1:2 macro settings, which I know won't compete with your proper macro lens, but may mean if you're out all day you can leave the macro lens at home and still be able to do some close up work if needed.
 
Dave_Taylor said:
If you want a little more reach and you're looking at a 300mm lens, for the price try the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG lens. Costs about £150 now (got mine for £129) but it really is very, very sharp - can send you some sample shots I took on my 40D. It also has a 1:2 macro settings, which I know won't compete with your proper macro lens, but may mean if you're out all day you can leave the macro lens at home and still be able to do some close up work if needed.
Click to expand...

I also have this lens and for the money I find it excellent! Iv'e had it for about 3 months and done a holiday and some birding with it. I had a canon lens and IMHO this 'feels' better! Quality is about the same.
 
The 28-300 is always going to be a compromise. The compromise will be image distortion and a fairly low max aperture. Its a good lens when you need to travel light. The 70-300 APO and 55-250 lens will knock the proverbial spots off it...
 
james450d said:
I like the idea of all of one lens covering the whole range from 28-300 so i dont have to keep swapping lenses. Just not entirely sure on the quality?

The 55-250 IS was also on my possibly list but read some pretty average review on this lens.

Greg - I will look at your flickr page when i get home!
Click to expand...

The 55-250 IS will kick the backside off the 28-300 which is one of the weakest super teles IMO.
Pete.
 
Thanks for all your advice everyone - I have purchased Gregs 70-300 and i'll see how i get on with it. If it doesnt suit my "lack of style" photography, then it will be back on here!!
 
It won't work on your camera James it's an American version;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top