Become a part of the community. Register and take part in all the features the site has to offer.

Results 1 to 17 of 17
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Morning guys. I'd like to dabble in some macro photography, but I can't see myself doing a lot of macro work. Just the odd flower and bug shot.

    I've been looking at 2 pretty cheap lenses, the Sigma 70-300 4-5.6 and the Tamron 70-300 4-5.6. What are your thoughts on these lenses?

    The extra reach is pretty nice to have and I suppose it'll have it's uses, but I mainly want it for macro work.

    I've heard the Tamron is slightly better, but they are impossible to find online in SA

    Thoughts?

  2. #2
    Frequent Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    61
    Posts
    2,208
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Want it mainly for macro?

    Simple - Buy a (real) macro lens.

    Those two that you mentioned are not macro lenses. The are multipurpose telephoto lenses with a facility to focus a little closer.
    Best,

    Leo Theron
    ... see my pictures HERE

  3. #3
    Frequent Member Peter Veitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Boksburg
    Age
    60
    Posts
    5,669
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Cannot agree with Leo more. You will live to regret the money spent on either of those lenses whilst a proper macro lens will continue to serve you long after the pain of the expenditure has faded from memory.

    Another option you might consider, if you have a god prime lense and very steady support, is a set of extension tubes.
    The more you practice, the luckier you get! (Gary Player)

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Totally with you, but as I mentioned, I don't know if I'll do macro photography enough to justify spending money on a true macro lens. So breaking it down, the Sigma seems like a nice cheap telephoto lens that I'll use for that purpose, but does have some for of macro capability

  5. #5
    Frequent Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Centurion
    Age
    61
    Posts
    2,208
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    I was ready to comment again… but decided against it.
    Best,

    Leo Theron
    ... see my pictures HERE

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Did someone steal your coffee this morning? :P

  7. #7
    Frequent Member Creeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    4,247
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    One of my first lenses was the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6. Didn't know what I know now. The lens is.......average to poor. It is okay until you hit 200mm, then it becomes soft. It can't do tracking due to the slow motor inside. And here is the catch. The macro only works from 200mm - 300mm and I think it is a 2:1 ratio, not like a real macro lens. Mine is currently lying on my desk, being used as a paperweight.

    So, if you want a Nikon mount Sigma, I'll sell to you for R700.
    Chris Bos

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Creeper, you've got PM

  9. #9
    Frequent Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,642
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Quote Originally Posted by anco85 View Post
    Totally with you, but as I mentioned, I don't know if I'll do macro photography enough to justify spending money on a true macro lens. So breaking it down, the Sigma seems like a nice cheap telephoto lens that I'll use for that purpose, but does have some for of macro capability
    Don't think of it as only a Macro. My 100,, 2.8 Macro makes a great telephoto (although the focusing can be a little slow).

    Quote Originally Posted by Creeper View Post
    One of my first lenses was the Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6. Didn't know what I know now. The lens is.......average to poor. It is okay until you hit 200mm, then it becomes soft. It can't do tracking due to the slow motor inside. And here is the catch. The macro only works from 200mm - 300mm and I think it is a 2:1 ratio, not like a real macro lens. Mine is currently lying on my desk, being used as a paperweight.

    So, if you want a Nikon mount Sigma, I'll sell to you for R700.
    Sounds a lot like the Tamron (which I'll sell you for R695 in Pentax mount)

    The other thing to bear in mind is that the "macro" capability on these lenses goes down to 2:1, not 1:1 like a true macro lens and is optically quite compromised.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    So what lenses can you recommend that wont break the bank. Would a set of extension tubes work well on a Nikkor 50 1.8?

  11. #11
    Administrator SimonDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Centurion RSA
    Age
    55
    Posts
    19,206
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    If you need to save money, then start by not spending it. I cannot recommend the non-APO version of the Sigma 70-300, it's not even a good paperweight as it topples over to easily. The APO is better by some margin and should be considered by those on a tight budget. However, the 'macro' designation is a marketing ploy more than anything else, and allows closer focussing at max zoom, giving you a 1:3.3 magnification, not macro by a long shot but rather close-up photography. Used carefully it will yield acceptable results for the first few months, helping you in your learning curve, then depending on your dedication and changes in level of expertice, you'll get frustrated with it and save up to buy a proper macro lens. Before anyone flames me on this, I did own the APO version for two years way back when I was still breaking into photography, it sold my first photos to help me in getting media accreditation for sporting events, and was a nice enough general walkabout lens for everything else. But I moved on when I felt it was good enough anymore and holding me back. I'm not one to recommend you don't buy entry level lenses, there's a serious learning curve to be had using them whilst you wait to get to the next step, but certain entry level lenses are to be avoided even if you're just a little bit serious about your photography.
    Simon Du Plessis

    www.actionimage.co.za simondp@actionimage.co.za

    (I'll keep on shooting, and one of these days I'll get it right!)
    Contact me for training in Beginners, Macro, Wildlife or Sport & Action photography
    Please e-mail or PM me should you wish to have my comments on a specific image, or to comment/ask questions on my crits)

  12. #12
    Frequent Member Creeper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    4,247
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Quote Originally Posted by SimonDP View Post
    If you need to save money, then start by not spending it. I cannot recommend the non-APO version of the Sigma 70-300, it's not even a good paperweight as it topples over to easily. The APO is better by some margin and should be considered by those on a tight budget. However, the 'macro' designation is a marketing ploy more than anything else, and allows closer focussing at max zoom, giving you a 1:3.3 magnification, not macro by a long shot but rather close-up photography. Used carefully it will yield acceptable results for the first few months, helping you in your learning curve, then depending on your dedication and changes in level of expertice, you'll get frustrated with it and save up to buy a proper macro lens. Before anyone flames me on this, I did own the APO version for two years way back when I was still breaking into photography, it sold my first photos to help me in getting media accreditation for sporting events, and was a nice enough general walkabout lens for everything else. But I moved on when I felt it was good enough anymore and holding me back. I'm not one to recommend you don't buy entry level lenses, there's a serious learning curve to be had using them whilst you wait to get to the next step, but certain entry level lenses are to be avoided even if you're just a little bit serious about your photography.
    Two thumbs up.

    On the otherside. I've seen success with the Nikon 50mm f1.8 with extensions. BUT, and let me state it again, BUT you tend to lose focus functioning, and if you go for the older Nikon without the build in motor, your Nikon (depending on the model) may not allow focusing with or without extensions. But for me, the Nikon 50mm f1.8 is my favourite. It is my standard lens as it fits my style of photography, which is not Macro.
    Chris Bos

  13. #13
    Frequent Member BrerFox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Boskruin, Johannesburg
    Age
    59
    Posts
    2,811
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Quote Originally Posted by anco85 View Post
    .... but I can't see myself doing a lot of macro work.
    .... but I mainly want it for macro work.
    Thoughts?
    Do I REALLY need to tell you my thoughts?
    Andre

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Pretoria
    Posts
    171
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    As an beginner I also like to play, from Macro to Moon. I bought a 2nd hand oooooold fully manual 50mm lens with 3 extension tubes and a reverse ring for only R250. With this setup I can get very, very, close.

    Look at this photo taken with that setup, ok I added a few more extension tubes (cheap ones as with the reverse ring you lose all camera control anyway).
    http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/galler...t-eyes&cat=500

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Windhoek
    Age
    29
    Posts
    200
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Quote Originally Posted by BrerFox View Post
    Do I REALLY need to tell you my thoughts?
    Sheesh, some of you people really need to learn to relax. Pre long weekend stress?

    Andre, using something mainly for macro and not doing much macro are not the same things, believe it or not.

    I want the lens to play with macro, that doesn't mean I'll spend 90% of my day taking pictures of bugs and hence the need for a cheap lens.

    You dig?

  16. #16
    Frequent Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Pretoria
    Age
    49
    Posts
    1,642
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    Quote Originally Posted by Big W View Post
    As an beginner I also like to play, from Macro to Moon. I bought a 2nd hand oooooold fully manual 50mm lens with 3 extension tubes and a reverse ring for only R250. With this setup I can get very, very, close.
    And if you hang around the forum long enough, you'll see that it's not only beginners who use a rig like this.

    Quote Originally Posted by anco85 View Post
    Andre, using something mainly for macro and not doing much macro are not the same things, believe it or not.

    I want the lens to play with macro, that doesn't mean I'll spend 90% of my day taking pictures of bugs and hence the need for a cheap lens.
    IMNSHO, if you want to play with macro, get a macro lens anyway. Without one, your playtime will be seriously frustrating. Cheap lenses generally aren't worth the money, with a few obvious exceptions, none of which are macro lenses.

    The one exception I've found with a zoom doubling as a macro lens is this one, although it also doesn't focus to 1:1, and comes with a small-sensor camera attached.

    Quote Originally Posted by anco85 View Post
    You dig?
    "You see, in this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig."
    Clint Eastwood in "The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.
    Not sure if a macro lens can be equated to a loaded gun.

  17. #17
    Frequent Member Dodging's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Boksburg
    Age
    41
    Posts
    323
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Sigma 70-300mm f4-5.6(Non APO)

    I had one of them Sigma 70-300 Macro lenses. I must be honest, I enjoyed using it until I eventually found it's limits. Up to that point I had a blast with it though

    In terms of macro shots, these were some of the better ones I got:








    So it's not a brilliant lens, but it's ok for the price. I'd suggest buying it 2nd hand though - then you can sell it for what you paid for it at a later stage
    shooter

    Oh Lord, thank You for the 70-200 f2.8 VRII - can now finally take pictures of the dog and kids running through the sprinklers...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •