 |
| The lens mounted on my Nikon D70 |
Pros
Dual purpose: Macro and Telephoto - Since my specialty is birds and macros, I enjoy being able to just flip a switch when I go from photographing Ospreys to Rambur's Forktails. Personally, I think the lens works better as a macro than a telephoto.
Autofocus - I'll say more about this later (in the cons), but I'm grateful this lens has autofocus, because most of the time I don't trust my eyes to manual focus.
Cheap price: $209 - Even though you get what you pay for, the photos I have took with this lens are not horrible for such a cheap lens.
Lens hood - it just makes the lens look sexy.
Those are all the pros I can think of right now. The cons will be more extensive, so brace yourself for a lot of negative remarks and foul words (such as "bad", "horrid", and "cheapy").
Cons
Autofocus - In the year and a half I've owned this lens, the autofocus it has crapped out on me three times! Not once, not twice, but three times! The first time was in January 2011, just three months after I got it. I was in the middle of photographing a flock of Cedar Waxwings when the autofocus motor decided to knock out of place. It took the Sigma repair company in Atlanta a whole month to repair it. The second time, in August 2011, when I was photographing Southern Skipperlings, the problem recurred and I sent it in again, this time to New York, and they got it back to me within a week. The third time was the absolute worst. While I was birding on Hilton Head Island, photographing Piping Plovers (one of the best birds ever), the autofocus crapped out. I was super mad at the lens then, and since it was out of warranty it would cost some to get it repaired. The lens still works when the autofocus craps out, but the autofocus only focuses on the farthest point of focus and consequently gets stuck there and buzzes like it's about to explode. Nowadays, I only use manual focus, but the manual focus isn't as perfect as it used to be either. Focusing manual is a pain. The manual focus is the complete opposite of smooth and there are some areas it refuses to focus on. I missed out on some nice photos of a Blue-headed Vireo on Jekyll Island thanks to that.
Before the autofocus was crapped out, it was still crappy. It only focuses on what it wants to and completely disregards the wishes of the photographer. Imagine a Northern Parula in a tree, seven feet away. The lens will focus on anything but the Parula. It's almost as if the lens hates me. The autofocus on this lens is really bad. It's horribly noisy when focusing. I don't have video capability, but my friend Alex who has a D3100 says the AF can be heard in videos. Major fault there.
No stabilization - Called Image Stabilization (IS) on Canons, Vibration Reduction (VR) on Nikkors, and Optical Stabilization (OS) on Sigma, this feature stabilizes the lens and reduces vibrations (you don't say?). This lens doesn't have it. The majority of the pics will turn out blurry if you don't use a high ISO, and if you have an older camera (such as the D70), that cannot handle higher-ish ISOs (ISO400+) without grainy noise, then your photos will turn out quite horrid in certain situations. Either way, your photos will either be grainy or blurry if you use my set-up or a similar one. No stabilization does help while panning or while photographing flying birds, but many lenses with stabilization have the option of turning it off.
Image quality - If you're shooting at close range, then the quality is fine. However, if you're a birder, most of the time you'll be shooting birds >15ft away. At 300mm, the quality can be quite awful if you're shooting a subject that's not between 5-10ft in front of you, and if you're shooting something 50ft away, the results can be depressing. That's probably why the macros turn out better.
Product quality - This lens feels like it's made of the cheapest materials possible. The exterior is plain plastic and rubber, and the paint isn't something worth praising.
Zoom quality - Two cool words, but the zoom feature on this lens is pretty cheapy. 70-300mm is a nice length for the price, but the zoom is awful. When twisting, the zoom ring is rough and very "sticky". Relatively hard to get it to 300mm in under a second.
Overall
This lens is junk; don't buy it if you'll use it everyday.
I would enjoy criticizing this lens more, but I must admit, even when the autofocus is broken, I can still take decent photos. I must also admit that the problem with the autofocus may be contributed to the handy, but large focus range of the lens (5-40ft, according to the focus ring).
Once I get this lens repaired for a third time, I'll be selling it in hope of a new set-up. If you are interested in buying it, hit me up! ;)
EDIT:. I have a link to a gallery a photos I've taken with this lens here.
Dual purpose: Macro and Telephoto - Since my specialty is birds and macros, I enjoy being able to just flip a switch when I go from photographing Ospreys to Rambur's Forktails. Personally, I think the lens works better as a macro than a telephoto.
Autofocus - I'll say more about this later (in the cons), but I'm grateful this lens has autofocus, because most of the time I don't trust my eyes to manual focus.
Cheap price: $209 - Even though you get what you pay for, the photos I have took with this lens are not horrible for such a cheap lens.
Lens hood - it just makes the lens look sexy.
Those are all the pros I can think of right now. The cons will be more extensive, so brace yourself for a lot of negative remarks and foul words (such as "bad", "horrid", and "cheapy").
Cons
Autofocus - In the year and a half I've owned this lens, the autofocus it has crapped out on me three times! Not once, not twice, but three times! The first time was in January 2011, just three months after I got it. I was in the middle of photographing a flock of Cedar Waxwings when the autofocus motor decided to knock out of place. It took the Sigma repair company in Atlanta a whole month to repair it. The second time, in August 2011, when I was photographing Southern Skipperlings, the problem recurred and I sent it in again, this time to New York, and they got it back to me within a week. The third time was the absolute worst. While I was birding on Hilton Head Island, photographing Piping Plovers (one of the best birds ever), the autofocus crapped out. I was super mad at the lens then, and since it was out of warranty it would cost some to get it repaired. The lens still works when the autofocus craps out, but the autofocus only focuses on the farthest point of focus and consequently gets stuck there and buzzes like it's about to explode. Nowadays, I only use manual focus, but the manual focus isn't as perfect as it used to be either. Focusing manual is a pain. The manual focus is the complete opposite of smooth and there are some areas it refuses to focus on. I missed out on some nice photos of a Blue-headed Vireo on Jekyll Island thanks to that.
Before the autofocus was crapped out, it was still crappy. It only focuses on what it wants to and completely disregards the wishes of the photographer. Imagine a Northern Parula in a tree, seven feet away. The lens will focus on anything but the Parula. It's almost as if the lens hates me. The autofocus on this lens is really bad. It's horribly noisy when focusing. I don't have video capability, but my friend Alex who has a D3100 says the AF can be heard in videos. Major fault there.
No stabilization - Called Image Stabilization (IS) on Canons, Vibration Reduction (VR) on Nikkors, and Optical Stabilization (OS) on Sigma, this feature stabilizes the lens and reduces vibrations (you don't say?). This lens doesn't have it. The majority of the pics will turn out blurry if you don't use a high ISO, and if you have an older camera (such as the D70), that cannot handle higher-ish ISOs (ISO400+) without grainy noise, then your photos will turn out quite horrid in certain situations. Either way, your photos will either be grainy or blurry if you use my set-up or a similar one. No stabilization does help while panning or while photographing flying birds, but many lenses with stabilization have the option of turning it off.
Image quality - If you're shooting at close range, then the quality is fine. However, if you're a birder, most of the time you'll be shooting birds >15ft away. At 300mm, the quality can be quite awful if you're shooting a subject that's not between 5-10ft in front of you, and if you're shooting something 50ft away, the results can be depressing. That's probably why the macros turn out better.
Product quality - This lens feels like it's made of the cheapest materials possible. The exterior is plain plastic and rubber, and the paint isn't something worth praising.
Zoom quality - Two cool words, but the zoom feature on this lens is pretty cheapy. 70-300mm is a nice length for the price, but the zoom is awful. When twisting, the zoom ring is rough and very "sticky". Relatively hard to get it to 300mm in under a second.
Overall
This lens is junk; don't buy it if you'll use it everyday.
I would enjoy criticizing this lens more, but I must admit, even when the autofocus is broken, I can still take decent photos. I must also admit that the problem with the autofocus may be contributed to the handy, but large focus range of the lens (5-40ft, according to the focus ring).
Once I get this lens repaired for a third time, I'll be selling it in hope of a new set-up. If you are interested in buying it, hit me up! ;)
EDIT:. I have a link to a gallery a photos I've taken with this lens here.
hello
ReplyDelete