Best budget 70-300mm for Nikon

f1charlie

f1charlie

Messages
1,211
Name
Charlie
Edit My Images
No
Much as I would like the Nikon VR version, it's a bit pricey for me at the moment. I keep watching fleabay in the hope that a bargain one will turn up, as I guess hundreds of others do too!
So what would be the recommended budget option - is the G version worth getting - kicking myself as I missed one on fleabay for £40 - worth a punt even if it turned out no good. Or is the Sigma APO a better bet? Or is there something else?
Thanks
 
I had the G version a while ago - it was terrible, couldnt autofocus at the long end, and was pretty flimsy feeling too. I really didnt like it.

All I can offer in way of opinion!
 
Hi Charlie :welcome: to TP :wave:

I think at £40 or so any of these lenses will be much of a much and you can always sell it on again if it's not to your taste - the most you can lose is £40 :LOL:

Why not try a wanted ad here on TP - someone might have one lying around that they're not using.
 
Thanks for the replies and welcome :).

I haven't read much favourable about the G and judging by the number that go on you know where I guess that reflects the opinions.

Perhaps I should just save up for a VR :thinking:
 
The G version is pants.

I would buy the Sigma 70-300 APO if I couldn't afford the VR.
 
Hi Charlie - welcome

I have the very item you are questioning - a Nikon 70-300 f4.5-5.6G in excellent condition (optically mint condition) - its had a filter on there since new (according to the previous owner) I purchased it 2 years ago along with some other bits so I don't have a price for it on its own. - It is complete with front and back lens caps, the hood AND the original box.

I was at the very start of trying to determine how much it was worth and the only one I was watching on ebay went for £72

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI....m=330299278781&ssPageName=STRK:MEWA:IT&ih=014

but I'm not stupid and realise that may have been a blip and the next one may go for a tenner.

If you think its worth £40 then let me know and I'll get some pics done for you

Leon
 
ive got the sigma one and i prefer it to the nikon one except i wish it had vr well os as sigma call it.
 
Dont bother with the G lens. I had one and never used it it was that crap.

I did the right thing and got the VR version, stunning autofocus, proper build quality, and VR2
 
If you can find a Nikon G or a Sigma APO cheap, give them a try, they may give you results you're happy with for a while. That'll give you some time to practice with a longish lens without VR/OS so by the time you've saved enough for the stabilised lens, you'll be able to get shutter speeds down to 1/15th at the long end! In short, the cheaper zooms are built down to a price but may well do what YOU want them to do. For prints up to 5x7 1/2" and screen/web use, the cheap lenses will probably be fine.
 
I guess I am the only one to differ with the rest who've had the G version. I had one, and loved it.

It was sharp, light weight, and great range .. and for the price I paid, it was practically free. Yes, it is very slow to focus, so the thing is ... if you need to use it for fast moving items then either learn to manual focus, or focus on a specific spot where you expect your target to pass and off you go! I've used it for F1 and it gave me some of the best shots I've got for such fast moving sport cars.

I eventually traded it in for the Sigma 105 macro, and paid the difference. The shop paid me £70 for it; so for £40 I'd say that's one good bargain for a very nice lens.

VR is great, and very useful, but remember there were, and continue to be, wonderful shots taken before VR came along. You can learn to shoot great shots without VR.
 
i had good experiences with the sigma apo 70-300 dg but if i remember rightly there were good and bad examples so it may be worth asking for an image taken using it.
 
Aha, another happy user (y)
 
I've got the Sigma APO lens and the only real criticism I'd make is that it sometimes takes awhile to focus and 'searches' around quite a bit. I've started to try and use manual a lot more now anyway. Mainly because of anal college tutors but that's another story :)

Having said that, it's much cheaper (or was when I was looking a year or so ago when I bought it) than the decent Nikon one flying around and it does what you need from a starter telephoto. I don't think there was anything else really to look at when I was in the market. For the extra bit of dosh that the Sigma costs (compared to the cheap Nikon's mentioned on eBay) you might aswell go for it because I've not heard too many bad things about it from "magazines" so I've never had that "Oh, I wish I'd spent a little more and got this..." feeling that I've had about other things in the past. Which is great considering its still a budget option really.

My kit consists of the 70-300 Sigma APO, 18-55 Nikon Kit and 50mm Nifty so it fits perfectly in there for me. Never really had any problems with sharpness either, not when it hasn't been down to my dodgy craftsmenship anyway.

Some of the Sigma shots.
 
joehughes said:
anal college
Click to expand...

Ooo-errr what do they teach there? ;)

Thanks for all the input - there's never an easy answer is there?

It seems the safe choice is the VR version as no-one seems to have any bad experiences (waits to be proved wrong), whereas the others seem to be pot luck whether you get a good or a bad example.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top