Customer Reviews

Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG APO Macro Motorized Telephoto Zoom Lens for Nikon SLR Cameras

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

i use this lens in the 70-200 range for portraiture or general telephoto photography, in the 200-300 range for near macro photography, and at 300 with a 50mm lens reversed onto it for extreme (6x's lifesize) macro shots. in all instances i've been generally pleased with the quality. it's a little soft at 200-300mm for telephoto work.

bottom line is if you're on a budget, you can't go wrong with this lens.

fyi: sigma has a couple versions of the 70-300 in circulation. this APO version is reputed to be sharper than the newer, non-APO version.

There are a lot of differing views on this lens. Thats great. Everybody's thoughts were very helpful to me in deciding to buy this. I'm glad I did.

For the Price it is hard to get a better deal. A lot of reviews complain about it not being faster or this or that. The fact is all the things it lacks only come in a far more expensive price range. If you have more money to spend and want something better then certainly it exists and you should buy that. If you only want to spend a couple hundred dollars and get a very sharp, versatile, multi-use lens then there is not much that can compete.

In the last month I've shot a lot with this lens and continually been impressed and happy with it considering how much I paid for it. I've used the macro mode and shot beautiful shots of insects, moss and water droplets. I've used the long end of the zoom to shoot surfers, sunsets, fisherman, ships, kids playing on the beach and a wedding. Whether in bright sunlight or dim twilight, all of it is quite sharp and exceeds my expectations for any lens at this price range.

I was looking for a 300mm lens that would allow me to take pictures of my family when they were on a field or long distance sporting events. I'm not a great photographer by any stretch, but I've received my praises here or there. I'm a very good amateur picture taker without knowing all the terminology. I read all the reviews from others and was a bit worried about the speed and noise of this lens but I wasn't going to get anything else at this price range so I made the order. Was I glad I did. This lens may be noisier and slower than a genuine Nikor lens, but it does a great job and clear as a bell at half the price. Locks in for a shot and works perfectly with my Nikon D40. Those with more experience may want more, but I don't think at my level, I could get any better at this price. Now if only I could find a bag to fit all these lenses. :)

I'm torn between 3 and 4 stars for this. It might not be fair, but while on it's own it might rate 4 or even 4.5, given the alternatives--specifically the Nikon 55-200mm f/4-5.6G ED IF AF-S DX for ~$20 more--I have to go with 3.

I've been shooting snapshots and kids sports on a D40 and D60 with the Nikon 55-200 VR for a few years, but was looking for something with just a bit more reach. I have the Nikon 70-300mm VR on my wish list, but at $400+ I can't really justify it at the moment so I thought I'd give the Sigma a chance. It only took a few hours and some test shots side-by-side with the 55-200 VR to decide to pack up the Sigma and return it.

The Sigma is heavier, longer, and louder than the 55-200 and unlike the 55-200, the filter and front of the lens rotates and extends in and out while focusing. I might be willing to live with that if the Sigma let me get a bit closer. The thing is, shooting handheld and comparing the results I realized very quickly that 200mm with VR cropped down yields photos at least as sharp as 300mm without VR... and that's just shooting against stationary objects.

I can imagine if you were shooting stills with a tripod or wanted the "macro" functionality for insects or other small subjects the Sigma might be the way to go, but for the average soccer mom/dad whose main use for a telephoto getting closer to the action, just grab the Nikon 55-200 VR.

Meanwhile, I plan to use the credit from returning the Sigma to get a head start on saving up for the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR.

Great value, excellent build quality, a pleasure to use in good light. Outstanding in macro mode.

This lens is an excellent example of a high quality product that Sigma is known for, delivered on a budget, and when used within its limitations delivers excellent results.

Ran this lens for 6 months on my Nikon D60 without issue. Now that I have a D300S, this lens remains in my bag. No optical stabilization is a real limitation. You wont be happy with any picture taken with a shutter speed of less than 1/125.

Feels great - the build quality is everywhere. Focus speed is good not great. The focus noise is there but not an issue.

Portraits at 100mm look wonderful on this lens!

Recommended!

I've read the reviews from 1 to 5 stars and can't see how anyone could give this Sigma lens below 4 stars; baring damage or factory defect. Some of the complaints that I've read; too heavy, too noisy, astetics are poor, poor focusing, poor fit, etc, etc. I've had this lens for about four hours and I've taken 50 or 60 shots alternating between my Nikor 55-200mm afs lens and I must say that this lens is a little "jewel". There is no VR, so a steady hand is required when zoomed out to 300mm(or a tripod). I went to the end of my dock here in Port Canaveral, FL, mid-day, with the lens connected to a Nikon D60 and shot at boats, fishermen, bugs, parked cars, the bridge, signs, screws (macro ), etc - - some fun. I've had a camera in my hands for some 45 years, had many cameras and lenses, taken a bizzilion shots, some good, most not so good but always shooting. All I can say is, for $200.00, you can't go wrong. Get it, knowing that it's not a thousand dollar lens and go have some fun shooting whatever tickles your fantasy (you can get that thousand dollar lens later when you've got the bucks).

I have researched lenses now for about a year and talked with other photographers in a group that I'm in. They believe that the Sigma & Tamron lenses are comparable to any of the Canon or Nikon glass. I purchased this lens for the price - I'm an amateur photographer and cannot afford to spend a lot of money on lenses. After using this lens, I felt limited to using it with a tripod. My hands aren't as steady as they used to be. I did get a couple of good shots from it, but not enough to justify keeping it. I found that the other reviews on this site were pretty true to form - especially with bird photography. I tried to photograph a cardinal in my back yard that was in a tree, but it kept focusing on the branches around the bird and the focus was slow compared to my Nikon 200mm. I did not get a chance to use the "macro" switch, but I did play with it for about an hour in my home. All it does is lock the lens, and there were a few times I had to play with it to get it to "unlock". In researching the next generation of lenses, neither of the brands have the "macro" switch. I still haven't decided which one I may choose, but going forward I will not buy another lens that does not have optical stabilization.

I was leery about purchasing this lens. I am just entering the world of semi-professional dslr photography and this was a big jump for me. The major complaints I read were that the focus was fuzzy at 300 mm and that the motor was a bit on the noisy end. I haven't noticed the fuzz but the noise is noteworthy, probably not enough to spook a bunny if within a ten foot radius.

As mentioned, this lens is also not for low lighting without a tripod. But I was able to get a lot of really clear pictures of still life set ups in my living room, handheld only. So for moving subjects, like weddings or small children, a flash is a necessity.

I would say I am very pleased so far with the performance and durability of the lens. It feels well made, though the primarily Japanese manual was a bit of a set back. There's English on it, just hard to find it. I also had a bit of difficulty getting it to snap on to my D40, compared to my traditional slr, in which switching lenses is a breeze. There was a lot of fidgeting to get it to fin correctly.

However, the image quality was outstanding for the price. A must for a starving college student. Literally-I skipped buying food this week so I could get the lens. This lens will pay for itself with one shot though in my opinion.

I looks very cheap, but... It's a great lens!!!

I got this lens to replace my Nikon 55-200 VR which was not sharp at all and with
soft colors. I was adviced to get this lens and was concerned because it does not
have Image Stabilization.

Well, this lens looks very cheap because the exterior coating its like a black
glittery velvet and makes it look like a toy, but thats it. The colors are vivid,
the pictures are amazingly sharp! The lens is a little heavy but does not creep so
that's a good thing and the macro is helpful but you need a tripod for that, it lets
you get so much closer to your subject (about 3.5 ft) and since it works only in the
range of 200-300mm it lets you get very good close ups.

I am very happy with this lens and specially with what I payed for it, definitely
recommend it to anyone looking for a good telezoom at a low price.

I took a chance on this lens and am so happy that I did. The macro function works very well. I bought a used Nikon 105mm macro for $600 and the Sigma lens is sharper in many instances. It's very lightweight and small which is good for all day shoots. I don't like carrying around a tripod so I usually hand hold my camera with a mini tripod attached that I place against my chest for support. The results with this cheap $200 Sigma 70-300 lens on my Nikon D90 have been fantastic in bright light. In dim light however, there the images are too soft and the lens hunts a lot. I'm so pleased with this lens that I'm going to invest in the Sigma 50-500mm when I have an extra thousand to spend.