Please vote on what lens you would choose

Please vote on what lens you would choose

  • 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR

    Votes: 8 36.4%

  • Sigma EX 150-500 mm F/5-6.3 APO HSM DG OS

    Votes: 14 63.6%
  • Total voters
    22
Digisatman

Digisatman

Messages
1,080
Name
Shaun
Edit My Images
Yes
Having just purchased a Nikon D7000 I'm at a loss on what lens to get

Bear in mind I already have a Nikon 70-300 AF G & a Nikon DX 18-55 AFS

Edit
I Just found an old Nikon AF 35-70 @ the back of the cupboard as well.

Do I go for
1 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G IF-ED VR £299 (Much better then I already own)
2 Sigma EX 150-500 mm F/5-6.3 APO HSM DG OS Lens Nikon seen for around £500
 
Last edited:
To be honest all sort's
Planes,
Wildlife
Portrait
Sport ( Squash)
Landscapes
Life on my travels around the south West.
 
Get the 70-300, sell your 70-300, then save another while and get the 150-500.
 
If I were you I would be looking for something to cover up to 70mm. I used to have to 18-70mm lens and I wish I had never parted with it, A good walk around lens not too big either
 
Last edited:
Not sure there is much point to the poll :thinking:

Only you will know how often you have hit the 300mm and wanted to zoom further, and only you will know how often you are disappointed with the quality of shots from your current lens.
And really only you can decide which is the most important factor to your shooting.
 
But it is nice and helpful to have other peoples opinions, knowing all the facts that i have provided & what they would choose given the option,

Then taking an overview of the poll / opinions, I can then way up my options with my own thoughts,
As it is at this present time it's either heads or tails both have pro's both have con's
 
Last edited:
I have just voted (for the 150-500). I am using one now and it is OK.

Just some thoughts on lenses.
Three zooms will take care of most general purpose shooting conditions.
An ultrawide, a standard zoom, and a medium tele zoom.

After that I tend to look at lenses for "specialised" photography
Very long tele when you cannot get near the action or you just want to reach in and "grab" things.
Fast lenses for shooting hand in low light etc, where you cannot use long exposures.
"Macro", T/S etc as needed.

I have purchased far too many lenses over the years.
 
I voted 150-500.

Planes & wildlife - likely to be better with the 150-500 than the 70-300 due to the 'longer' lens.
Portrait - Out of the 2 options the 70-300 would be probably be better for this, but one of your other lenses may be a better choice
Sport ( Squash) - can't see either the 70-300 or 150-500 suiting this too much
Landscapes - probably more suited to shorter focal lenghts so no advantage to either 70-300 or 150-500
Life on my travels around the south West - I'd be more inclined to think you'd use a 'general' walk around lens, but maybe slight advantage to the 70-300
 
The 150-500 is massive, a pain to lug around (fine if you're sitting in a hide) and the image quality so-so. I used to own both lenses you mention and never used the 150-500 - I preferred to crop the 70-300VR.
 
Used to have both, now have just the 70-300 VR. For squash in particular, a faster shorter lens would be better.
 
Digisatman said:
To be honest all sort's
Planes,
Wildlife
Portrait
Sport ( Squash)
Landscapes
Life on my travels around the south West.
Click to expand...
Based on this^ i"d say you need more reach as you have the short end covered, so go for the siggy. i have the 150-500 and love it. hth mike ps look at my flickr in the link below the animal shots were all taken using this lens i"m an amateur photographer but you get the idea :)
 
Last edited:
:agree: What Mike said. I've just done a quick overview of my Wildlife images taken then this year (mainly zoos) and 37% of my shots are in excess of 300m and only 7% are between 70mm and 150mm. I would imagine that you would be at the longer lens for planes as well.

However get yourself to a shop and try one for size, it isn't the lightest of lenses. I've also found it handy when its busy as people tend to move out of the way when they see a big lens :)
 
twist said:
At 300mm the 150-500 is F5.6. Same as the VR.
Click to expand...

True but for squash, 70mm is too long and light levels are so low that f/5.6 is too slow.

For planes and wildlife, the 150-500 may be a better bet but for the other uses listed, the 70-300 is the lens I chose (and would choose again!)
 
Nod said:
True but for squash, 70mm is too long and light levels are so low that f/5.6 is too slow.

For planes and wildlife, the 150-500 may be a better bet but for the other uses listed, the 70-300 is the lens I chose (and would choose again!)
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought you meant between the 2 lenses, not a 3rd option. Totally agree with a faster 'other' lens in that scenario.
 
I went for the Nikon AF-s 80-400mm f4.5-f5.6 G ed N lens but looks as if it is a bit out of your price range. On a Nikon D800 the extra 100mm wont make that much difference because of the sensor size will take up that in PP. I did look at the 150-500 sigma lens but decided on the Nikon as on as it is super fast with focusing
 
Last edited:
I would go for the Siggy and pick up a 50mm or 35mm f1.8 at a later date.
the primes would cover your indoor sports and portraits but your 18-55 at the long end is ideal for portraits.
 
I voted for the 70-300VR.

I had the 150-500, a bargain from the classifieds here, and while IQ was ok and the reach was nice, it was a bit slow to focus in less than great light. Also, I found I was often leaving it behind in favour of my old 55-300, partly due to the weight, and partly due to feeling like an arse carrying it around. This was not just on family jaunts, but even on a TP weekend away it spent most of the time back in the bunkhouse while I took less extreme options. Having realised this I got rid and bought the 70-300, which (for me) is better in every way. Managable size, quicker to focus, and (I think) generally better IQ even when cropped in to compensate for the difference in focal length. My use for these lenses was mostly motorsport, Zoos/wildlife and moonshots.

Obviously your mileage may vary, but I'm pleased with the change.
 
What I would choose is not relevant*.

And if you knew what you wanted to achieve the choice would be easier. Don't buy a lens just because you can. Buy it when you know it can do something you want to do that you can't do with what you've got.

My vote would be that you buy neither of these lenses, but instead have a couple of brews and review the images you've taken in the last year and those you haven't taken but wanted to and were prevented from taking because you didn't have a suitable lens.



*because it wouldn't be either of the lenses listed because neither suit my personal style.
 
Thanks for that Alastair, It's a new D7000 no photo's to compare only with what was taken on an old D50 with an old Nikon 70-300 AF G which cannot be compared to the option above
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top