Cheap Sigma Lens

C

CoolBug

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 2, 2005
Messages
1,910
Reaction score
1
I did one of those spur of the moment buys which I almost never do

it is 70 - 300 but it also has macro

I got one of these Sigma Lenses for 1.6k at incredible deception, I didn't know the price of the lens online though.

It seems really nice, I it's the first lens I've bought other than the one that came with my camera which was an 18 - 135 IS canon box lens.

http://www.sigmaphoto.com/shop/70-300mm-f4-56-dg-macro-sigma
 
I'm too lazy to go check, but it looks like one I've had for a year or three. It's ok. The macro works well. I've found that quality doesn't hold up quite to the edges. :-)
 
Was my first lens purchase as well.
I went on a course presented by a professional sports photographer, he called it a door stop.
He was right!
 
nanonyous said:
Good to learn with, will eventually become the thorn in your side when you need consistent results for the tele end of things.
Click to expand...

Indeed. What we all need is a decent 300 mm prime :)
Now if only I had a spare R68000 to spend on a 300 mm f/2.8 (in Nikon land). I would even settle for the R16000 compromise and take the 300 mm f/4 ....

I think even the 120-300 mm f/4 Sigma would be wonderful. </daydreaming>

I guess if you can actually earn money with your photography, then it is possible to justify those lenses.
 
fvdbergh said:
Indeed. What we all need is a decent 300 mm prime :)
Now if only I had a spare R68000 to spend on a 300 mm f/2.8 (in Nikon land). I would even settle for the R16000 compromise and take the 300 mm f/4 ....

I think even the 120-300 mm f/4 Sigma would be wonderful. </daydreaming>

I guess if you can actually earn money with your photography, then it is possible to justify those lenses.
Click to expand...

This lens I have at the moment gives better results and can be bought on eBay for the equivalent of a few hundred rand. Then you just need to get a R70 adapter, also from eBay, to fit it with. Best part is that it's f/4 or so constant aperture. Want macro? Throw in an extension tube. The 'macro' this sigma lens and this cheap MF lens claim to have is usually only around 0.5x MM for 135 film size, anyway.

As for great-performing telephoto zooms that have AF and IS etc, there's the Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM and Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM for around R15k, or the Canon 70-200mm f/4L USM for R5.2k or so. Yes, markedly more expensive, but also all drastically better performing than all the bottom of the barrel 75-300mm zooms from Tokina, Canon, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron and Pentax.
 
fvdbergh said:
Looks like a fun lens, but I'd have to practice quite a bit before I'd be able to focus manually on wildlife @ 200 mm. How far do you typically stop this lens down?
Click to expand...

I can't yet mount it, I've only used it with a self-made shim to get it to roughly infinity focus, but I can't attach it to the camera with that. As for stopping it down, it's sharper wide open than the Canon 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III USM at any given focal length and aperture combination - so you stop it down as much as you need to fit your subject into the DoF as with any other lens.
 
fvdbergh said:
Indeed. What we all need is a decent 300 mm prime :)
Now if only I had a spare R68000 to spend on a 300 mm f/2.8 (in Nikon land). I would even settle for the R16000 compromise and take the 300 mm f/4 ....

I think even the 120-300 mm f/4 Sigma would be wonderful. </daydreaming>

I guess if you can actually earn money with your photography, then it is possible to justify those lenses.
Click to expand...

Don't you mean f/2.8? I few sports photographers I know swear by it even though one of them is constantly having to send it in.

I've got a canon 300mm f/2.8 but it's not getting as much love as it used to since I picked up a 400.
 
bwana said:
Don't you mean f/2.8? I few sports photographers I know swear by it even though one of them is constantly having to send it in.
Click to expand...

Whoops! Confused the older Sigma 100-300 f/4 and the newer Sigma 120-300 f/2.8.

Would not mind either, though.
 
I have exactly this problem (2 mins into video). Cheap plastic gears fail because of the high torque of the Alpha camera motors.

[video=youtube;-3AmjoI4_Ys]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=-3AmjoI4_Ys#t=120s[/video]
 
Canon cameras don't use an internal motor, the lens' focusing system gets driven by its own motor. In other words, if you get the Canon mount Sigma 70-300mm it's using its own motor that was designed/chosen by Sigma, so it shouldn't strip itself nearly as easily, and you should thus be safe using AF.
 
nanonyous said:
Canon cameras don't use an internal motor, the lens' focusing system gets driven by its own motor. In other words, if you get the Canon mount Sigma 70-300mm it's using its own motor that was designed/chosen by Sigma, so it shouldn't strip itself nearly as easily, and you should thus be safe using AF.
Click to expand...

True. Didn't use the lens much, and only switched on the camera last night when it happened. Oh well.

On the other hand, Sigma should about this by now.

On the other, other hand. Lens was cheap by comparison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X