List Price: $359.00
Sale Price: $239.00
Today's Bonus: 33% Off
I have only had 2 days to play with this lens, but so far am impressed with it's performance. I bought this mainly for outdoor use as I have a Nikon 70-200 f2.8 VR lens for indoor shooting. I simply do not want that mammoth lens on my camera when hiking, etc., especially since fast aperture is not necessary in good light. This one looks like it will do nicely. Focus is pretty fast hunts a little in lower light at telephoto, but that's pretty common for most lenses of this type. Image quality is very good so far. Some very minor fringing in a few of the shots (not an issue with JPEG's from my D90 because it automatically removes most CA). I'll shoot some RAW shots outdoors when I get a chance to see if it is anything to worry about, but so far it appears to be acceptable. Focus is extremely accurate dead-on on every shot taken (no front focus issues that some Sigma lenses have). OS is also VERY impressive. I'd say really close to Nikon's best VRII lenses. I took a couple of 1/4 sec. shots handheld with only my elbows braced against my ribs, at full telephoto, and the shots were perfectly sharp. You can see the image start to float when the shutter is half-pressed, so you know the stabilizer is working. Lens mounts snugly onto the camera and has a good, sturdy metal mount like the better Nikon lenses have. Fits perfectly. I like the size and weight compared to the Nikon equivalent (it is somewhat more compact). The only drawback is that the lens is not internal focusing like the Nikon (which probably accounts for the compactness). This means that the lens hood must be a round one (not a petal hood, which I prefer) because the end of the lens rotates as it focuses. It also extends about 7/8 of an inch at closest focus, which makes the overall length pretty long at 300mm (about 8 inches without hood, around 10 with the hood attached). None of that really matters much to me, though. One thing that I liked about this one compared to the Nikon 70-300 VR was that the aperture starts at f4, not f4.5, so it's a bit faster than the Nikon. The shallow depth of field was surprising to me. Longer focal lengths tend to really amplify the effect at closer ranges, and that is very apparent with this one.
The best way to rate this lens would be to break down specific attributes, and then give a score (1 to 10) on that attribute, so here goes:
Image quality (so far): 9 (impressed with every one taken thus far color, sharpness, etc. quite good)
Focus accuracy: 9 (low light the only issue)
Focus speed: 8 (could be a little better)
Focus noise: 7 (not as quiet to focus as Nikon AF lenses even my huge 70-200 f2.8 VR lens is lots quieter)
Fit: 10
Finish quality: 7 (surface not as good looking or durable looking as Nikon, but not ugly either)
Optical Stabilization: 9.5
Size/weight: 9
Overall ease of use/functionality: 9
I will update with more information after using the lens more. I cannot give the lens 5 stars, although I believe it is not far from achieving that. I think most people will agree that this lens is worth the money spent and will do what it is intended to do, and do it well.
Update: Feb. 2010Have taken a few more shots with this lens. All-in-all still very satisfied with it. The fringing noted earlier is there a bit more than I first indicated. RAW shows slightly more than the JPEG's, but it is fairly easy to remove the majority of it in Lightroom. Some images look a bit soft. When I compare them to the 18-105 Nikon kit lens, I initially thought they were pretty comparable,but they are a tad bit softer when looked at closely. It is much softer than my 70-200 f2.8, even when that one is shot wide open and the Sigma is FAR behind on anything stopped down to f4 or higher on the Nikon. However, I would expect nothing less from a lens that is over 5 times as expensive. Outdoor shots are very respectable from the Sigma It is my recommendation that a person use this lens stopped down some outdoors, particularly at 200mm and above, as the fairly shallow depth of field when zoomed will render some subjects in front of the main subject out of focus, even on relatively distant shots. F8 to f11 fixes that most of the time. My initial rating of 4 stars still stands, as I feel that image quality is less than perfect, but as good as anyone should expect at this price level. The only individual rating that would change is the image quality that I rated a 9, is more like an 8 still pretty good. Is is considerably better than a Nikon 55-200 VR that I sold recently it was soft across the frame, with a very bad left side. Perhaps a bad copy? Anyway, the Sigma 70-300 OS is a lens I am proud to carry in my gear bag, and one that will work well for me for a long time.
Update 2: Mar. 2010 Upon further inspection of the images, it appears that shots taken stopped down some are a fair bit sharper than when shot wide open. Stopped down shots look to be sharper than just about any of the Nikon 18-105 ones, but are softer than the Nikon when shot wide open. That being said, my recommendation in a sentence or two is: shoot this lens stopped down a bit and don't expect to use it in low light without flash or for indoor sports. The best shots will result from the lens set too slow to be of much use in those cases. If I have more to report, I will do so later.
0 comments:
Post a Comment