Some quick lens help please...
Discussion
Hi All,
I've got my D50 and the 18-55mm lens, however as I thought I want a longer lens and had been thinking of getting either the 70-300mm G or ED nikon lens, however I've read some things on the web that suggest it's not a real Nikon made lens and they're both made by Tamaron which removes my reason for buying one over the sigma lenses as I'd already heard they were really the best for the money.
So my question is, do I get the Nikon 70-300mm G or Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO DG or the outside choice that I like the sound of (if it's any good) Sigma 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 DG Macro?
I'm thinking that the Sigma 70-300 is probably the best quality lens of the 3, but would be interested if people think the 28-300 will be as good as the 70-300 between 70 and 300mm? any ideas?
Cheers,
Ben.
I've got my D50 and the 18-55mm lens, however as I thought I want a longer lens and had been thinking of getting either the 70-300mm G or ED nikon lens, however I've read some things on the web that suggest it's not a real Nikon made lens and they're both made by Tamaron which removes my reason for buying one over the sigma lenses as I'd already heard they were really the best for the money.
So my question is, do I get the Nikon 70-300mm G or Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO DG or the outside choice that I like the sound of (if it's any good) Sigma 28-300mm f3.5-6.3 DG Macro?
I'm thinking that the Sigma 70-300 is probably the best quality lens of the 3, but would be interested if people think the 28-300 will be as good as the 70-300 between 70 and 300mm? any ideas?
Cheers,
Ben.
Well, I've got the Nikkor 70-300mm ED lens, and it's a superb bit of kit. I wasn't aware it was made by Tamron? It's certainly a lot more solid than Tamron lenses. The only thing is that it's quite expensive, all things considered.
I've been hearing a lot lately about how Tamron are getting some excellent results with their telephoto lenses - and the last few reviews I've read of late have said much the same thing.
That said, though, both the Sigma and the Tamron are meant to offer image quality that's pretty comparable with the Nikkor lens quality, but of course the lenses themselves are cheaper and probably not as well screwed together. Though I don't know for sure, I'm only going by what I've heard from others...
Anyway. In a recent review I read, the Nikkor ED was meant to offer the best image quality and overall lens quality, but it lost points because it's so expensive compared to the competition.
>> Edited by SGirl on Thursday 27th April 10:24
I've been hearing a lot lately about how Tamron are getting some excellent results with their telephoto lenses - and the last few reviews I've read of late have said much the same thing.
That said, though, both the Sigma and the Tamron are meant to offer image quality that's pretty comparable with the Nikkor lens quality, but of course the lenses themselves are cheaper and probably not as well screwed together. Though I don't know for sure, I'm only going by what I've heard from others...
Anyway. In a recent review I read, the Nikkor ED was meant to offer the best image quality and overall lens quality, but it lost points because it's so expensive compared to the competition.
>> Edited by SGirl on Thursday 27th April 10:24
Thanks for the replies so far chaps, the link below is explaining what I've read in a few places about the cheap Nikon 70-300mm G and ED lenses.
www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70300af.htm
I think I'll get myself down to a camera shop and try to have a play with as many as possible.
If anyone does have any experience it'd be great to know your thoughts about the difference between the sigma APO 70-300mm and the 28-300mm.
www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/70300af.htm
I think I'll get myself down to a camera shop and try to have a play with as many as possible.
If anyone does have any experience it'd be great to know your thoughts about the difference between the sigma APO 70-300mm and the 28-300mm.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff



