70-300mm for Nikon?

[Eppingkeeper]

Has anyone any thoughts/experinces on a 70-300mm for Nikon? I like the look of the Tamron for it's 1:2 macro but wonder what the quality would be like given the price - reviews seem to back up this concern. Other choices are the Sigma or the Nikon. Would spend the extra on the Nikon if it's worth it?

[john drake]

I purchased a Sigma 70- 300 lens a few months ago for my Nikon D80 and found the lens to be good, the only problem I have is the noise of the motor, which when you are focusing does seem to be loud. I would say it was a good general lens and not very heavy.
I now find I would like to get a 150-500mm lens for my taking bird photos but if it is any indication how I rate the Sigma I will be keeping it as the photos have been quite good and nicely focused and any problems have been of my lack of experience of bird photography.
Like yourself I an new to this forum and will be putting up some pictures taken down in Cornwall last month shortly.

[MadDogMcQ]

Hi! You don't specifically say which Nikon lens you are considering. I have an older "G" lens and it is pathetic!! Extremely soft after 200mm and ultra slow focusing.

The "D" lens is not a great deal better from all accounts... read Rockwell's review HERE. Bear in mind that like most reviews, it's just one man's opinion! He actually refers to the Tamron too in the review.

The newer "VR" model might be the one to go for if you can afford it. My experience of VR is very good. I have an 18-200mm and think it's a cracking all round lens. These are what I would consider to be "serious amateur" lenses.

As for Sigma, I have 3 lenses from their "EX" range and love them all. Even the ridiculously long-range 50-500mm is a smooth operator. They represent excellent value for money compared to the Nikkors. Can't say I'm too keen on the matt finish though.

Regards, Tom.

[Eppingkeeper]

Thanks Tom & John,

I had heard that the Sigma could be noisy (no pun intended), that and the Rockwell reviews have led me to order the Nikon VR. Off to Uist & St Kilda next week so will let you know how it gets on.

Jon

[momji1971]

Just a quickie, on vr Nikon. yep, its a great lens, brilliant lens for the money. But to get the best out of it try not to shoot to the full 300mm and if light allows try to shoot around F8 ish. You'll find your images a bit sharper this way.

Have fun.

p.s. try and get a couple of reviews, nikonians/dpreview etc. Ken Rockwell doesn't exactly get good reviews himself!!!

regards.
Stu.

[MadDogMcQ]

Ken Rockwell (like many other people out there) is quite opinionated and as a result is often slated, but his reviews of equipment are (in my eyes) just as valid as any other individual's review.

IMHO, you should consider the opinions of as many people as possible and then try and make a balanced decision based on the data you've gathered.

[momji1971]

Exactly! Thats what I meant. Just wanted to point out Ken isn't the be all and end all of reviews.

regards.
Stu.

[ian500]

I got the sigma 70-300 apo for my D60. Still getting used to it (and the macro at the 200-300 end) but it looks to be producing nice pics. I was advised that the Tamron was a bit soft and of course the Nikon VR will make a difference in low light. Difficult choice so good luck
Ian500

[ChrissyMarie]

I have the 70 -300 VR and I love it. I bought it back in January and haven't regretted it at all.
It does seem to have some sweet spots and as Stu says, the sweeter spots are below the full 300mm. I think the thing I love most is the bokeh with wildlife shots that just never seems to be as good with my other lenses despite what Ken R says
My OH loves it for aircraft shots too, the VR is great for being on the move.

[bob.phillips]

I agree with both chrissy and stu. I am happy with my Nikon 70-300mm VR, just back off a bit from max zoom and use mid f-stops if possible.

Bob P.