Sigma APO 70-300mm F/4-5.6 DG MACRO

[NeoTokyo]

Here are the links to do side by sides.

Sigma 70-300mm APO DG
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses_all_details.asp?id=3303&navigator=3

Sigma 70-300mm APO Macro Super II
http://www.sigma.com.hk/lens/telezoom/70_300_4_56_apo.htm

You tell me, but this is what I see; From the lens groups to the MTF charts its all identical.

When looking at the two side by side I only see changes in finish, zoom ring grip/tread and the addition of a little gold tag that says "Sigma APO DG."

The only thing that I see on the DG thats different is that they say it has different lens coatings to reduce Ghost and flare.

[ef2]

The Super part might just be the name of the overseas version.

[brecklundin]

Here are a couple examples of the macro detail of the 70-300 APO DG Macro...I have four pics to show the DOF and hopefully the focus detail For the most part they are all 100% crops though a couple had to be sized down to fit forum spec. Still I wanted to preserve non-target subjects to show the focus ability...none of them went through any PP.

In each case the pencil most in focus was the intended subject. I did vary the focus point also to test the macro focus, all were spot metered.

There was no real purpose here other than to show myself the macro was usable for what I wanted it for and it easily passed as these are unprocessed images and can be adjust a tad to improve a few things...but I was pretty impressed by the ability to keep the subject in focus all hand held while floating on a waterbed w/o any image stabilization...to my eye these are pretty decent.

The first two:

#1: @300mm, f/9, 1/50sec, ISO 800, Flash fired, CPL
#2: @190mm, f/5.6, 1/160sec, ISO 800, Flash fired, CPL

[brecklundin]

here are the remaining two using different focus points...btw, all are on a 40D...

#3 & #4: @300mm, f/5.6, 1/250th, ISO 800, Flash fired, CPL

[Wekkel]

Let's say these pictures look quite bad and do not show the potential of this cheap but powerfull lens. Of course, it's ok to show what you get, but posting 100% crops without the pictures that you would normally use (the whole picture as carefully chosen when shot) is not telling the whole story to potential buyers of this lens.

Let's be real: its a lens leaving lots to desire in the long run, but for the money and the small pocket, its a great buy. I am a critical person and own this lens for more than one year. My desires for now: 17-50 Tamron instead of the kitlens (18-55mm) and the Sigma 30mm 1.4. The Sigma 70-300mm will stay a little longer than only a year ;)

[brecklundin]

sorry you don't understand the point of the pictures...it was a technical examination of how the lens works when forced to focus in macro mode, period. Not a bunch of meaningless numbers, charts and graphs...simply a way to see the level of detail the lens can resolve in macro mode. And while it might not seem important to you, now here is the great point of life, it will matter to someone else. Keeps the world from being monotone.

[scrumpy]

sorry you don't understand the point of the pictures...it was a technical examination of how the lens works when forced to focus in macro mode, period. Not a bunch of meaningless numbers, charts and graphs...simply a way to see the level of detail the lens can resolve in macro mode. And while it might not seem important to you, now here is the great point of life, it will matter to someone else. Keeps the world from being monotone.

Agree. Wekkel has completely missed the point. Thanks for showing.

[Daniel2000]

here a shot I made in macro mode with extention tubes

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/macros/_MG_0022full163687.jpg

[OvenBaked]

here are a few of mine, all taken at 300mm

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3278/2599700188_4d85d4e906_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/2581248597_2a779f5260_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3088/2578803786_ecd30d3bb9_o.jpg

[brecklundin]

scrumpy: Thanks for seeing what the idea I had in my head. I think maybe Wekkel was thinking about when folks get too enamored of 100% crops of non-macro captures. And maybe I didn't explain myself as completely as I might have...it was nice Wekkel gave me a chance to clarify my intention.

Daniel2000: That is a CLEAR macro close up. Took me a double take to even notice it was an earbud headphone. To me the exposure and coloring looks dead on.

OvenBaked: Fun, is that a chipmunk? Maybe named Alvin? :D Great exposure and focus on the birdy. Looks as if it just got done doing some fluffing and preening of it's carefully numbered feathers... ;) Was the butterfly in macro mode or a closeup in normal focus mode?

[OvenBaked]

OvenBaked: Fun, is that a chipmunk? Maybe named Alvin? :D Great exposure and focus on the birdy. Looks as if it just got done doing some fluffing and preening of it's carefully numbered feathers... ;) Was the butterfly in macro mode or a closeup in normal focus mode?

yep, the chipmunk was hanging out at sandbeach lake, in RMNP, about 10k feet of elevation.

The butterfly was in macro mode, but It could have been a close up in normal mode (I was using AF, so im not really sure exactly how far away I was)

The bird was taken while I was waiting for a sunset, I had nice lighting :)

[Daniel2000]

Daniel2000: That is a CLEAR macro close up. Took me a double take to even notice it was an earbud headphone. To me the exposure and coloring looks dead on.


thanks
I only have normal extention tubes for now (no auto focus or aperture control)
so I had put my camera on Av mode, pushed the aperture preview button before taking my lens off
set to f/9, 300mm in macro mode manual focus on tripod, bounced flash & a flash light (2 million candles :p) to give it a little more light
ISO 100, 1/60 sec
and finally, a little touch up in PhotoShop

[NeoTokyo]

Holy Hell those are Ear buds?!
It took me a second, at first I thought it was some sort of lint removing orange juicer :P

Kenko Tubes are kinda expensive around ($160ish) but you can find them on ebay for $120 shipped from a couple venders, just in case you want to be able to AF :)

Though I am not sure if the Kenko DG series is compatable.

[brecklundin]

Holy Hell those are Ear buds?!
It took me a second, at first I thought it was some sort of lint removing orange juicer :P



could'a been worse...it could'a been a nose hair trimmer... :lol:

As to the Kenko on a DG lens...I have a self imposed moritorium on hardware advice as the past couple days I went 0-fer-the-day so...I ain't gonna say nuttin'!! :)

Oh, heck, here is a thread that seems to hold the answer:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=102553

[brecklundin]

here a shot I made in macro mode with extention tubes

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/macros/_MG_0022full163687.jpg

It just dawned on me, using tubes decreases your element to subject minimum distance (you have to move closer to the subject)? Yes?

If you can't tell I never have used a set of tubes but do plan on getting a set of macro gear for rainy days and when I am not up to venturing far from home on certain days.

The biggest drawback I found for the macro mode on this lens is the minimum distance is something like 4.9' so if tube(s) actually reduce(s) this distance it would make the lens more useful in tighter places. Then again the tube(s) do make the lens longer...but at worst it would make the lens useful in places where you cannot create the distance the lens needs.

Do I have this one right?

[Daniel2000]

Holy Hell those are Ear buds?!
It took me a second, at first I thought it was some sort of lint removing orange juicer :P

Kenko Tubes are kinda expensive around ($160ish) but you can find them on ebay for $120 shipped from a couple venders, just in case you want to be able to AF :)

Though I am not sure if the Kenko DG series is compatable.

he he
my present tube shure don't have any elctronics but cost me only 9$
I intend to get a kenko kit eventualy

It just dawned on me, using tubes decreases your element to subject minimum distance (you have to move closer to the subject)? Yes?

If you can't tell I never have used a set of tubes but do plan on getting a set of macro gear for rainy days and when I am not up to venturing far from home on certain days.

The biggest drawback I found for the macro mode on this lens is the minimum distance is something like 4.9' so if tube(s) actually reduce(s) this distance it would make the lens more useful in tighter places. Then again the tube(s) do make the lens longer...but at worst it would make the lens useful in places where you cannot create the distance the lens needs.

Do I have this one right?

the Minimum Focus Distance is 59.7" (37.4" In Macro)
with my set of tube, arround 68mm if I'm right, I get arround 2 feet or 2 ft and a half from my subject, you don't get that much closer but it show in the lens as the subject get arround 50% bigger :)

[brecklundin]

Daniel:

Thanks for your explaination about using the tubes on the 70-300. That's a big decrease in distance and a great increase in image size.

Do you know if we need to use the "DG" version of the Kenko's? Or is there really no difference between the DG and "regular" version?

[Daniel2000]

I don't know, I didn't check about that yet, the kenko tubes will wait for now, I first want to get a Tamron 17-50mm before anything, most importantly, before my friend marriage, in less then 2 months... :p

as for the mount for EF-S and EF lenses, the mount is identical, it's the lens that is different, the EF-S is made to give a full image on a crop captor, on a full frame you will get a black contour as the lens can't produce an image large enough to cover the entire full frame captor, but some EF-S type lenses might not fit on a full frame for the fact that the lens could protrude more into the casing of the camera, and as the mirror being larger, it could enter in collision with lens
as the compatibility issues from the tubes, I can't figure out why it wouldn't work, they are just TUBES, not lenses, if we were speaking about kenko tele converters, that would be an other issue, will look into it, it's intrigue's me...

[brecklundin]

tubes are in the future for me too...

as to why I asked about the issue of the DG tubes it is because the tube(s) sit between the lens and camera body. For the lens features to function the tubes would need to sort of pass-through any signals being sent between the lens and camera body.

[NeoTokyo]

Kenko describes the DG version of their tubes as an upgraded version for digital Camera's.

I dont know exactly what they changed but it is important for the connection to be made from the body to the lens for proper function. Both version have pins to make the connection and the tubes can not be used with EF-S lenses.

It looks like the old tubes only make a difference on the Nikon system, they are not auto focus compatible with Nikon AF-s (Silent Wave) lenses, manual focusing is required with these lenses."

Kenko's website suggests switching to manual focus to keep the lens front hunting around for an AF point. Using all the tubes together cuts 3 fstops off.

Looks like cheap tubes arent that bad of an option now :D

[brecklundin]

thanks Neo...filed away for when I go tube shopping. ;)

[Daniel2000]

and back on topic with some new shots... ;)

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/cars/_MG_1673.jpg

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/cars/_MG_1377.jpg

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/cars/_MG_1390.jpg

[brecklundin]

those are great pics!! Everytime I begin to wonder if I really need to keep this lens and should just replace it with a set of tubes and a Sigma 150mm macro I see pics like this and tell myself I need to use this lens a LOT more...

In fact tomorrow I am going to make a point of using it all day. With my 55-250 in the shop for inner element goobers looks like a good time to take this one out and about. ;)

[Picklett]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3160/2668472004_540202c821_o.jpg

190mm, f/5, 1/500, ISO 400

[ef2]

I used the non-DG ones I think, and they worked without any problems.

[bauerman]

One from a recent airshow. Turning up the ISO a bit , setting the camera to AI SERVO and burst mode.......the Sigma was able to keep up for the most part.

http://jbauer.zenfolio.com/img/v0/p602343095.jpg

[Ed 718]

Awesome shots people I can't wait to try out my lens which I should be getting it shortly.

[brecklundin]

tomorrow...tomorrow...I love ya tomorrow...it's only a daaaay aaaaaaway.... :lol: hehehehe

[Ed 718]

tomorrow...tomorrow...I love ya tomorrow...it's only a daaaay aaaaaaway.... :lol: hehehehe

If I do get it tommorow I will try it for some indoor carting. Any ideas on settings since the lighting is rather dim indoors.

[brecklundin]

hey ed,

hard to say as I never used an XTi body. And dim is kinda vague. But the lens on the short end does stop down to f/4 so, while it's not f/2.8 or less, it's not unworkable. And I am not sure how much noise the Xti might add above ISO400. Still I took some pretty dimly lit shots in the bedroom at night, at 5.6 the focus can hunt a bit but I found you can usually coax it into finding focus by zooming out to get focus then sneaking up on the zoom level/focus you want. But, in a normal office environment and lighting, no problems at all. In fact, again not knowing the Xti, I bet you could shoot f/7-f/9 @iso400 easily...and the same if you use the built-in flash @ iso100-200. If you look back a bit on this page I think, you will find some pencils I took pics of...those were in macro mode and zoomed out towards well past 200. I believe they were something like ISO100, f/9 and 1/40th? this was with only a single 100w equivalent daylight bulb in the lamp on the headboard. So, it does OK as long as the subject is well lit. If the subject is moving it needs more lighting the farther out you zoom. but that is true of any lens.

Pencils Post (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5846712&postcount=605)

I am still learning and usually take a bunch of test shots to dial in for the lighting before I try and get some keepers. Now and then, I just get lucky early.

And, dang it, be POSITIVE...it will be there tomorrow, you are like Zone 1, maybe Zone two from me... :) hehehehehe.... :p

[AV6Scott]

http://img123.imageshack.us/img123/7493/75884014xa4.jpg

http://img255.imageshack.us/img255/5641/52959416wc5.jpg

[brecklundin]

wow...those are GREAT! Wish I could still have gluten (no wheat [or dairy] in my old age...dang it anyway!!)

[AV6Scott]

Thanks. In good lighting on a tripod, my copy of the lens likes to work really well and produces some nice pictures. It's the low light pictures that give it problems.

[Ed 718]

hey ed,

hard to say as I never used an XTi body. And dim is kinda vague. But the lens on the short end does stop down to f/4 so, while it's not f/2.8 or less, it's not unworkable. And I am not sure how much noise the Xti might add above ISO400. Still I took some pretty dimly lit shots in the bedroom at night, at 5.6 the focus can hunt a bit but I found you can usually coax it into finding focus by zooming out to get focus then sneaking up on the zoom level/focus you want. But, in a normal office environment and lighting, no problems at all. In fact, again not knowing the Xti, I bet you could shoot f/7-f/9 @iso400 easily...and the same if you use the built-in flash @ iso100-200. If you look back a bit on this page I think, you will find some pencils I took pics of...those were in macro mode and zoomed out towards well past 200. I believe they were something like ISO100, f/9 and 1/40th? this was with only a single 100w equivalent daylight bulb in the lamp on the headboard. So, it does OK as long as the subject is well lit. If the subject is moving it needs more lighting the farther out you zoom. but that is true of any lens.

Pencils Post (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5846712&postcount=605)

I am still learning and usually take a bunch of test shots to dial in for the lighting before I try and get some keepers. Now and then, I just get lucky early.

And, dang it, be POSITIVE...it will be there tomorrow, you are like Zone 1, maybe Zone two from me... :) hehehehehe.... :p


No worries on delivery date Robert and thanks for the tips. I will def try some different settings and see what works best. I am still new on the photography so every single time I shoot I learn new techniques. I used my 200mm at a ball game and really liked the results so a longer zoom would def be a plus. On a side note you mentioned I can make up lost light but gong with a higher ISO but would that also cause noise in my shots?

[number six]

On a side note you mentioned I can make up lost light but gong with a higher ISO but would that also cause noise in my shots?

Higher ISO means more noise, but often not enough to notice. Depends on the subject.

I've been experimenting with high ISO on my 30D, usually with the Sigma 70-300, in low light.

This is at ISO 3200, wide open. I did some noise reduction on the background, none on the foreground:

290467

Since the background is OOF, it shows noise much more than the fine detail of the cat's fur.

-js

[Daniel2000]

a new one made with it

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/macros/_MG_2055.jpg

[CameraMan741]

WOW!! i should be getting mine in the next couple of days. im pretty exited!!!

[Rachel B]

I have noticed on some macro/close up shots my pictures look smooth and lack detail, does any one have any sugestions why this is?

[number six]

I have noticed on some macro/close up shots my pictures look smooth and lack detail, does any one have any sugestions why this is?

Post an example and we'll have a look...

-js

[Rachel B]

Ok here you are, I just dont think they are as detailed as others, now some of these are my earlyer shots, and I have improved a bit since then,do you think its motion blur that caused the picture to be smooth?
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3030/2460835772_23628ffff5.jpg?v=0

the purple flowers just look strange
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/2457882399_8ae6ce3982.jpg?v=0

Could it be the aperture was to large?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2273/2495710262_820b270404.jpg?v=0

[number six]

It's hard to tell with such small pictures, but detail looks good to me. The background on the rose is OOF, which I assume is intentional. A smaller aperture will make the background more focused, but that would be a poorer picture IMO...

-js

[MT59]

Nothing a little USM wouldn't fix. Are you sharpening your images at all (on the computer)?

[MT59]

While I'm at it, I'll add another shot to the archive. I was particularly pleased with this one, considering I was shooting handheld. 1/500th, ISO 200, 300mm, f/5.6.

One issue I've been having with the lens is when focusing at further distances, such as this bird (about 50 ft. away). If the bird is already in pretty sharp focus and I half-press to refocus, it'll go out of focus, like the lens overshoots a bit. If I aim somewhere else where the lens has to refocus a fair amount, then refocus on the subject again, it tends to pretty well nail it. Like it's a little loose or sloppy. Might be the cause of many a dull or slightly OOF image complaint.

http://malcolmtalley.smugmug.com/photos/340040110_LPkQU-XL.jpg

[Rachel B]

usm?
yes i do sharpen, but it depends on the picture, and i cant remember with that one.

[Hardcore]

WOW, I just saw this thread for the first time. With the quality of images coming out of this lens, I'm a little dissapointed in my recent purchase of the canon 70-300mm IS.

[jeanvanb]

I just picked up one this week. Here's one of the first shots with it:

By the way. How do you post a 100% crop and keep it under 150 kb ??

[number six]

By the way. How do you post a 100% crop and keep it under 150 kb ??

Make it smaller and/or compress it more.

-js

[steevo2008]

Wife snapped this one at the Auckland Zoo the other day..Not too bad I thought.
She certainly likes the Sigma 70-300APO

Steve
From NZ

[jeanvanb]

Make it smaller and/or compress it more.

-js

Oke... but with more compression it wouldn't be a 100% crop would it ?

Greets,
J

[number six]

Oke... but with more compression it wouldn't be a 100% crop would it ?

Greets,
J

Two different things. Don't resize it, that would make it not a 100% crop. But when you save a jpeg file you have the option of adjusting how much the file is compressed. Select higher compression levels for smaller files. They won't look much, if any, different and the picture will have the same number of pixels (so still be a 100% crop) but the file will be smaller.

-js

[jeanvanb]

Two different things. Don't resize it, that would make it not a 100% crop. But when you save a jpeg file you have the option of adjusting how much the file is compressed. Select higher compression levels for smaller files. They won't look much, if any, different and the picture will have the same number of pixels (so still be a 100% crop) but the file will be smaller.

-js


Oke ... i'll take a look at that. THNX,
J

[KarlosDaJackal]

Got it yesterday......

Image:
@300mm ISO1600 shutter(forgot it)

Image was run through dpp to correct white balance, set sharpness to 5 and reduce the noise (both sliders set to 8 )
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3210/2757914144_d28cdfa245_o.jpg

Review:
Seems to have good build quality, it had a rough first day of use (small drop in its case also) and it seemed to hold up well. Its a daylight lense though, it was a overcast day taking that shot (and many others) and the iso had to be at 1600 with the apeture at its fastest of 5.6 (@300mm) to get a usable shutter speed for a lens this length.

Focus is perfect but a bit noisy (like the Canon EF 50mm 1.8 sounds) but you will be so far from your target they won't notice.

Included carry case, hood (reversible), rear cap, centre pinch front cap all for €200 for the APO version, fantastic value. Its inexpensive but feels like a quality product

[SingingSabre]

Guess when this was from! ;)

ISO 100, 8seconds, F22, if I recall correctly. Handheld. Kidding! Not handheld!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y208/SingingSabre/Portfolio%20in%20the%20making/IMG_5763_smallwtmk.jpg

[Daniel2000]

2 I took last weekend

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/Karting%20Grand-Mere%2010-08-2008/IMG_3019.jpg
http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/Karting%20Grand-Mere%2010-08-2008/IMG_3251.jpg

[Rachel B]

New one from today
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3130/2788316340_42df3e8e07_o.jpg

[Canon_For_Life]

Still think this is an amazing lense for the price :)

#1
http://m-b-photography.smugmug.com/photos/356937513_3Jr8p-M.jpg

#2
http://m-b-photography.smugmug.com/photos/356939425_M8Szr-M.jpg


EDIT: Fixed links, sorry about that.

[Rachel B]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3021/2807851098_5ef877c478_o.jpg

Tripod Free.

Canon 30d with the Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro Lens, mode set to manual F/5.0, 1/125seconds with ISO set to 640, focal length 168.

For post processing I applied a high pass layer set to soft light and reduced the noise on a separate layer with a reduced opacity. This image is also cropped

[boomer3297]

Duck.... quick:)

[Amfamora]

Here a few macros from yesterday out in the Garden :)

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v157/Amfamora/Flower2.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v157/Amfamora/Flower3.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v157/Amfamora/wasp.jpg

[Rachel B]

home made light box two tanle lamps, my lens camera and tripod gave me something to do this rainy night:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3223/2903945958_c9eafb5d56.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3212/2903945512_7ec9cc4764.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3121/2903101051_c7f733ca28.jpg?v=0

[Vascilli]

The Digital Photo Expo here in Calgary has this lens on special at $260 with bag, tripod, and filter. What do you think?

[tin.risky]

Got a great price on one of these from someone on the forum, and guess what? UPS lost the package. Luckily, there was insurance on it. As soon as they reimburse the money I'll be looking for another copy, but you guys are making me want to just run out to B&H and pick one up right away :D.

[CameraMan741]

i got mine from b&h for 220. good deal i guess. lol

well, here are some samples...
from the zoo
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3048/2810840663_0cee5992a2_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3232/2769395011_1567340903_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3291/2739399051_1ef860e9d2_b.jpg

focused on the tree in this one.
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q185/nemo_66/Leopard2.jpg

another day at the zoo. it got a little more active.
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q185/nemo_66/Canon%20Rebel%20XTi/LeopardFace.jpg

wasnt ready for the shot, wrong settings, not setup, etc. etc. but i saved the picture...
http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q185/nemo_66/Canon%20Rebel%20XTi/BengalTigerYawningalot.jpg

[bauerman]

Recent one of my daughter.........lens has some good bokeh, partially the product of this lens having 9 aperture blades unlike many less expensive lenses.

http://jbauer.zenfolio.com/img/v4/p424047658.jpg

No matter how many lenses get released since Sigma put this overachiever out, it will not make these photos any less pleasing.

[cesstrelle]

This was taken with the 70-300 sigma, but the cheapest version of it they make I believe (might retail around $150?). Works much better as a macro than as a zoom for wildlife/sports/etc.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3074/2552075238_ba8711e305_b.jpg

[SamClarkPhotography]

All taken with the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG and extension tubes. Click for full size:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/71/159570120_b669d65964.jpg (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/71/159570120_b669d65964_o.jpg)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/147782566_e2ca0a4f23.jpg (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/53/147782566_e2ca0a4f23_o.jpg)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/44/143608605_99c776e937.jpg (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/44/143608605_99c776e937_o.jpg)

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/141523304_bf009807cb.jpg (http://farm1.static.flickr.com/55/141523304_bf009807cb_o.jpg)



What kind of a setup did you use for these shots?

[godzirrraaaaa]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3180/2861187849_63f23c5f58_o.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/godzirrraaaaa/2861187849/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3041/2756294130_c99f19b623_o.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/godzirrraaaaa/2756294130/in/set-72157606694561104/)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3139/2861716493_44165b3c03_o.jpg (http://flickr.com/photos/godzirrraaaaa/2861716493/)

[SamClarkPhotography]

Was the skyline shot taken with an 8-point filter on it? Or was it added by PS?

[Rachel B]

Panning shot
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/2994333118_9b3bc492b4_b.jpg


Candid style
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3039/2994332648_ffe6148c53_b.jpg

My husband doing a tandem Skydive
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3136/2994332876_678c4591b6_b.jpg

[mrbigisbudgood]

I'll throw a couple up here

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2007/2007_USGP/F1_Qualifying/IMG_1510.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2007/2007_USGP/F1_Qualifying/IMG_1549.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2007/2007_USGP/Forumla_BMW_Saturday/IMG_1451.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2007/Muscatatuk/IMG_1819.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2007/Muscatatuk/IMG_1822.jpg

http://i76.photobucket.com/albums/j9/mrbigisbudgood/2008/0704_Vacation/IMG_4343.jpg

[topluck]

Sold! I will be getting this lens!

[SamClarkPhotography]

I would highly recommend it. I have really enjoyed this lens and taken some great shots with it!

[godzirrraaaaa]

Was the skyline shot taken with an 8-point filter on it? Or was it added by PS?

With a filter.

[Daniel2000]

was having fun last night with water and coloring

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/IMG_9257.jpg

[AV6Scott]

Was at the zoo today with a group of local photographers and I came up with these.

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/7489/64159773sl7.jpg

http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/6503/65434653se2.jpg

http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/3512/16017034fi5.jpg

[prash]

Wow!

Guys, I just ordered this lens, and cant wait to have it in my hands:-)

[SamClarkPhotography]

You'll be happy with it.

[memorex88]

Here's a macro of an orange....


http://i118.photobucket.com/albums/o102/memorex88_2006/451a31c4.jpg

[prash]

Here are my first images:

Image1 (http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=742513)
Image2 (http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=742512)
Image3 (http://www.dpchallenge.com/image.php?IMAGE_ID=742510)

I think this lens is tack sharp.. even at 300mm. The one thing to be careful about is camera shake at that focal length. I used a tripod for most of these.

[Pete Gl]

Looking away fom Salford Quays along the Manchester Ship Canal.

F8, 10sec, ISO100, 214mm

http://i484.photobucket.com/albums/rr210/Pete_glynn/Salford%20Quays%2027th%20Nov%202008/fl4.jpg

Pete

[olly_k]

Was at the zoo today with a group of local photographers and I came up with these.


Lovely shots those - shows that a combination of good light and a good photographer can produce images that arguably exceed the lens's price tag!

[KarlosDaJackal]

How about a bongo?


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/3108280052_f2d25bf220_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3108280052/)

[mantamark]

Thanks to this thread i have just bought a 2nd hand APO version of this lens.

What i would like to know is, what TC would be best to use with this lens to get close up & personal with little critters?

Does the manufacturer make a big difference?

Thanks.

[number six]

I don't think any TC works decently with this lens. Never tried one, though.

A while back I recall a post from a POTNer who bought a Sigma TC with his Sigma 70-300 APO and found it didn't give decent results.

-js

[KarlosDaJackal]

I don't think any TC works decently with this lens. Never tried one, though.

A while back I recall a post from a POTNer who bought a Sigma TC with his Sigma 70-300 APO and found it didn't give decent results.

-js

A Sigma TC (I have one) won't physically fit this lens (I have one), nor a Canon one(same design as the sigma) as they have some glass that has to fit into the back of the lens.

You could try the kenko or tamron ones, as they don't need to stick into the back of the lens to work.

[TomSinclair]

Just been looking at this lens 2nd hand, how much would be a good price for it GBP (£)?

[mantamark]

What does the Macro button actually do?

Don't know if i'm using it to its fullest, but tried taking two pics, one with it on, one with it off, and i really can't see any difference?

Just waiting for my batteries to recharge, wasted them all playing with decorations, pens, pencils & birds!

[mantamark]

PS, Tom, i think they are going for Around £100 at the minute, couple on ebay i think, and i just got one 2nd hand, but with the sigma 10-20mm for £325, happy bunny!

[Daniel2000]

What does the Macro button actually do?

Don't know if I'm using it to its fullest, but tried taking two pics, one with it on, one with it off, and i really can't see any difference?

Just waiting for my batteries to recharge, wasted them all playing with decorations, pens, pencils & birds!

the macro switch can only be used between the focal length of 200 to 300 mm
and give you the possibility to get closer to the subject and focus, hence the biggest the subject will look in the frame, you can even get focus closer by using extention tubes

[mantamark]

So macro switch just reduces the minimum focus distance?

And if i use Tubes, i can get even closer?

Awsome, got to get me some of those.

Kenko ones do the job?

[Daniel2000]

on that I can't answer as I didn't tried them but I heard good things from them, the tubes I have are really cheap (10$) and don't transmit contacts to control the lens functions, so basically, I end up with a manual lens on which I can't control aperture, but in a near future I certainly do want to get some Kenko tubes, has they have contacts and are a bit less costly then others, and will probably get a 1.4X TC also

[mantamark]

My First two useable shots, straight out of camera, taken from my mum's 2nd storey window, looking down into the garden, quite happy, but get to get the faster shutter speeds, birds move far too fast! Also got to get the Tubes so i can get in closer.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v255/mantamark/Canon%20eos%20400d/Crimbo%2008/IMG_0007.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v255/mantamark/Canon%20eos%20400d/Crimbo%2008/IMG_0038.jpg

Also firts shots using a "proper" tripod, takes quite a bit getting used to the ball head.

Going to have lots of fun with this one!

[Mike_S08]

I just picked up this lens... I havnt really had good weather to truly test it out.. My question is. Is it me or is it damn near impossible to take a pic zoomed in without a tri pod?

[Pete Gl]

Yes, it is near impossible to take a hand held pic at about 300mm focal length +, with ANY lens, that's not a fault with your lens Mike, it's just a failing of the human body.

Pete

[Mike_S08]

thought so...Thanks... I am used to using my nifty fifty

[number six]

I just picked up this lens... I havnt really had good weather to truly test it out.. My question is. Is it me or is it damn near impossible to take a pic zoomed in without a tri pod?

It's possible, but it takes luck at lower shutter speeds (below 1/500 or higher).

In post #592 of this thread, the cat was shot at 1/250 sec, 300 mm focal length.

The secret is to use high-speed shutter drive and machine-gun it - you may get lucky. :lol:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showpost.php?p=5733576&postcount=592

[bigrig]

Just got this lens...I'm enjoying the macro feature, but still trying to get a good bird shot. Most of the pics are 300mm @ 1/500, I guess that could be part of the problem.

I'm contemplating returning this and trying the Canon 55-250 IS...but then I'd lose the macro function, right?

Samples below are from a 40D. First two are JPEGs straight from the camera, the last was cropped, a little saturation and unsharp mask.

Matt

http://images42.fotki.com/v1379/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_1951-vi.jpg

http://images43.fotki.com/v1389/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2010-vi.jpg

http://images45.fotki.com/v1394/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_1993B-vi.jpg

[bigrig]

Alright...got some shots in late afternoon sun. Boosted the ISO to 800 to get around 1/800 shutter. The blue heron I tracked for ~30 shots but only got one or two in sharp focus. Had better luck with the other birds. All are cropped from JPEG.

Matt


http://images43.fotki.com/v1439/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2037B-vi.jpg

http://images43.fotki.com/v1388/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2049B-vi.jpg

http://images46.fotki.com/v1414/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2055B-vi.jpg

http://images46.fotki.com/v1433/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2058B-vi.jpg

http://images42.fotki.com/v1373/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2059B-vi.jpg

http://images45.fotki.com/v1431/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_1966B-vi.jpg

[Daniel2000]

taken at the family reunion last week

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/portraits/IMG_9643.jpg

[Canon_For_Life]

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I LOVE the expression Daniel! :lol:

I was taking a drink when I saw this, unfortunatly now that drink is all over my screen :lol:


Great image :)

[Daniel2000]

thanks :lol:
and sorry for the screen... ;)

[Wekkel]

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/5381/is2bd9.jpg
With some panning...

[Channy]

Some AMAZING shots from this lens.

I bought mine a day ago but I can't use it because my 350D is in for repairs :( I'm dying to use it!!

[bigrig]

Couple more pics.

Cropped and unsharp mask
http://images44.fotki.com/v1418/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2092B-vi.jpg

Cropped and saturation
http://images42.fotki.com/v1379/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2100C-vi.jpg

Matt

[bigrig]

More pics! Cropped and unsharp mask. I was pleased with the bird-in-flight shots, the originals have pretty good detail.

http://images22.fotki.com/v818/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2196B-vi.jpg

http://images26.fotki.com/v892/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2268B-vi.jpg

http://images54.fotki.com/v1613/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2281B-vi.jpg

http://images29.fotki.com/v1010/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2282B-vi.jpg

Matt

[memorex88]

More pics! Cropped and unsharp mask. I was pleased with the bird-in-flight shots, the originals have pretty good detail.

Matt

Beautiful shots!

[Daniel2000]

here a couple more

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/macros/IMG_0025b.jpg

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh26/Daniel2000/macros/IMG_9332.jpg

[LeuceDeuce]

This thread is what finally convinced me that this was the lens for me. I spent a long time comparing the real world samples in the flickr groups for this lens as well as the Canon 70-300 IS (not the DO version). To be honest I just couldn't see any difference in the IQ of the images being posted in those groups. At less than half the price, my choice was a no-brainer.

I'm not much of a wildlife photographer, but this lens is nothing short of fantastic. The images I've taken so far have been very sharp, and I am a very happy customer.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3341/3239096331_333419f2e7_o.jpg

[olly_k]

Nice pics! I really think this lens excels with the better cameras that employ more advanced focusing systems but still I get nice pics just not consistently sharp.

This thread is what finally convinced me that this was the lens for me. I spent a long time comparing the real world samples in the flickr groups for this lens as well as the Canon 70-300 IS (not the DO version). To be honest I just couldn't see any difference in the IQ of the images being posted in those groups. At less than half the price, my choice was a no-brainer.

I'm not much of a wildlife photographer, but this lens is nothing short of fantastic. The images I've taken so far have been very sharp, and I am a very happy customer.

[LeuceDeuce]

Loving this lens...

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3396/3252640758_2443c2fff7_o.jpg

[KarlosDaJackal]

great shots LeuceDeuce, it still one of my favourite lenses.

[LeuceDeuce]

Addicted

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3479/3253376231_a3311e9f38_o.jpg

[tristo]

This is a great lens the IQ really surprised me , in low light yes there are better but for the price you cant go wrong only got this during the week and already im counting down the hours till i get to go out and about with it again :D

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3395/3261252088_71194c3284.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3435/3260719525_2f852cd0a1.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3319/3260721943_40dd2f5fed.jpg?v=0

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3354/3261547694_9707024ee0.jpg?v=0

[KarlosDaJackal]

These are all shot on Film, specifically Fuji Superia 400 (consumer grade film), developed and scanned by my local fujifilm center. No digital trickery involved.

300mm, f/6.7, 1/350 (Manual focus as the heavy snow fooled the camera)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3269415923_18426896d9_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3269415923/)

300mm, f/6.7, 1/125 (supported on the side of a chair)

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3479/3270235692_f2e338edae_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3270235692/)

300mm, f/6.7, 1/350 and finally my favorite, poor little thing. Little bit of motion blur at this speed.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3269414023_ae15880711_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3269414023/)

[mr_c_ash]

100% crop at 300mm

[Problematiche]

All of the photos on this thread have been convincing me to get the Sigma lens, but can anyone say how it compares to the Canon 55-250mm IS? And perhaps the Canon 100-300mm USM. Those are the lenses I was considering before, but the Sigma is even cheaper, and seems to be very solid. How important is IS at 250m and 300m?

[olly_k]

All of the photos on this thread have been convincing me to get the Sigma lens, but can anyone say how it compares to the Canon 55-250mm IS? And perhaps the Canon 100-300mm USM. Those are the lenses I was considering before, but the Sigma is even cheaper, and seems to be very solid. How important is IS at 250m and 300m?

This lens is really for people who can't afford anything better. I am not really sure of the above mentioned lens's but I will say the IS will be very useful on overcast days. There is always a trade off you need to read some reviews and decide if you want to sacrifice 50mm for IS and all that. I probably would tbh!

[KarlosDaJackal]

All of the photos on this thread have been convincing me to get the Sigma lens, but can anyone say how it compares to the Canon 55-250mm IS? And perhaps the Canon 100-300mm USM. Those are the lenses I was considering before, but the Sigma is even cheaper, and seems to be very solid. How important is IS at 250m and 300m?

Optically similar. In build/usage/accessories the Sigma is better but the Canon has IS. With the price difference you can add a monopod to the Sigma and you have everything the Canon has and more. A monopod can cost less than a Canon hood can (you get a hood and case with the sigma, you get nothing with the canon)

This lens is really for people who can't afford anything better. I am not really sure of the above mentioned lens's but I will say the IS will be very useful on overcast days. There is always a trade off you need to read some reviews and decide if you want to sacrifice 50mm for IS and all that. I probably would tbh!

I disagree with this. I could have any of the 70-200L if I wanted them, I choose to keep this and I have some awesome 8x10 prints from it. I going on an outing tomorrow and once again this lens is gonna be constantly attached to one of the camera bodies. I live in an overcast country too :cool:

[bigrig]

All of the photos on this thread have been convincing me to get the Sigma lens, but can anyone say how it compares to the Canon 55-250mm IS? And perhaps the Canon 100-300mm USM. Those are the lenses I was considering before, but the Sigma is even cheaper, and seems to be very solid. How important is IS at 250m and 300m?

I think the USM Canon will focus faster. Haven't actually used it, though.

The IS is useful when you have slower shutter speeds, but if you're trying to capture action you need a fast shutter speed anyways, and IS won't do much.

Matt

[KarlosDaJackal]

This was taken with my
1. Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro, used wide open
2. Canon 40D
3. Manfrotto 484RC2 ball head, kept slightly loose
4. Manfrotto 685B Neotec Monopod
5. Manual Mode - 300mm - f/5.6 - 1/160 - ISO400

Minor processing done in Canon's DPP raw converter (white balance, 8x10 crop)


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3652/3300387620_106571f862_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3300387620/)

[origamione]

Very nice shot, love the composition.

Couple more pics.

Cropped and saturation
http://images42.fotki.com/v1379/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_2100C-vi.jpg

Matt

[number six]

I think the USM Canon will focus faster. Haven't actually used it, though.

I'm sure it does. My USM lenses all do - but I can live with the Sigma's focusing. It's not fast, but I wouldn't call it slow - and it's accurate.

-js

[bigrig]

Beautiful shots!
Very nice shot, love the composition.

Thanks guys! Here's a decent pic I got today. This little guy let me get pretty close. In fact I wanted him to fly, and he wouldn't. :P

Matt

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3596/3324225031_c3e1813918_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/53598920@N00/3324225031/)

[bigrig]

Finally got some sharp shots of the heron. Sorry for all the bird pics, I need to shoot something else.

I've got a question - does the focus lock slow down the burst rate? I recently tried a Canon 70-200L and it seemed the burst rate was a lot faster. I want to give the Canon 100-300 USM a try...

Matt

http://images28.fotki.com/v1001/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_3546B-vi.jpg

http://images46.fotki.com/v1453/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_3548B-vi.jpg

http://images47.fotki.com/v1472/photos/4/401442/5986462/IMG_3553B-vi.jpg

[number six]

Wow! Great shots!

-js

[KarlosDaJackal]

Ain't film great, no AA filter to soften the image

This was at 300mm, and I did use the onboard zooming flash of the EOS5. I guess the shutter was probably 1/125 or 1/200 (my default flash setting) aperture was probably f/8. Film was fuji neopan400cn profesional, procesed in a fuji frontier box at my local fujifilm centre. Handheld with the flash frezzing motion.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3578/3324058822_02c2aa0b4d_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3324058822/)

[ajayclicks]

A few more which I hope I have not posted before

1).
http://flickr.com/photos/ajayclicks/3111575042/sizes/o/in/set-72157608465552172/
http://flickr.com/photos/ajayclicks/3111575042/sizes/o/in/set-72157608465552172/http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3097/3113263975_51ab8c1146_o.jpg

2).
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3026/3111575042_e02c957a9b_o.jpg

3.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3283/3074026950_04dd40a10a_o.jpg

Cheers
Ajay

[Techuser]

Can you guys posting birds post a 100% crop to see the details? The day I get a DSLR I will get this sigma lens to shoot birds, but im fraid cause ive read that its not very sharp at 300mm

[bigrig]

Can you guys posting birds post a 100% crop to see the details? The day I get a DSLR I will get this sigma lens to shoot birds, but im fraid cause ive read that its not very sharp at 300mm

Here's a couple from my recent pics. I'm sure it's not the best quality image possible from a 300mm lens, but it sure is a good value!

Matt

[KarlosDaJackal]

Another film shot and a Macro to boot.

This was on a tripod, high shutter speed probably 1/1000, think aperture was f/8, film was some cheap fuji superia 400 thats slightly out of date. Developing and Scan by local store. Print does not show so much noise. No live view on an EOS5, had to manual focus and trust my eyes.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3594/3368873180_511eb1880a_b.jpg
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/karldenby/3368873180/)

[Rachel B]

I am selling mine-its in the for sale section.

Photo of a fake rose that I took tonight as a sample of the macro function, used a canon 30d ISO 500(as I forgot to change it from the other pictures) F6.3 shutter 1/160 and 430ex flash

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3568/3368735881_48456f6ed4_o.jpg

[BenJohnson]

Shot this wasp-type insect with the 70-300 APO in macro mode:

http://benjohnson.smugmug.com/photos/377578742_KGWHU-L-1.jpg

[Daniel2000]

wow Ben, nice shot ;)

[BenJohnson]

Thanks! It is a very capable lens when light is available. Couple more shots:

http://benjohnson.smugmug.com/photos/381797633_vhroa-L-1.jpg

http://benjohnson.smugmug.com/photos/382626277_Q2eo8-L-1.jpg

[Techuser]

Here's a couple from my recent pics. I'm sure it's not the best quality image possible from a 300mm lens, but it sure is a good value!

Matt
Looks a lot sharper than some other samples ive seen!
now im in doubt about this and the canon 55-250

[bigrig]

Looks a lot sharper than some other samples ive seen!
now im in doubt about this and the canon 55-250

Well I guess if you're looking to get stationary birds I would go with the IS on the nifty 250. But for birds in motion and flight the Sigma will get you a little tighter and cheaper too. But actually I want to try the Canon 100-300 USM to get faster focusing during the high burst rate shots.

Matt

[seansd]

This looks like a good place to ask my question about Sigma 70-300mm. I know that there is APO and non-APO version for this Lens. Is there also an APO DG and APO non-DG ? I have this lens which I bought used and it has a APO label on it, but there is no DG label anywhere on the lens. I tried googling with no luck.

[LeuceDeuce]

This looks like a good place to ask my question about Sigma 70-300mm. I know that there is APO and non-APO version for this Lens. Is there also an APO DG and APO non-DG ? I have this lens which I bought used and it has a APO label on it, but there is no DG label anywhere on the lens. I tried googling with no luck.

There are only two versions of this lens not three.

The DG: http://buy4less.lv/images/products/Sigma_70-300_4-56_DG.jpg

The APO DG: http://www.fototraveller.ru/news/images/sigma_70-300apo.jpg

DG just means that it is a regular 35mm lens. DC would mean it was specifically designed for the smaller sensors of non-full frame cameras.

There is no DC version of this lens at the current time.

[lelik11a]

Hi all, been here on the forum for a while, but never posted before. So better late then never...
Was out walking in the forest, and tried out sigma 70-300... Got it like 4-5 months ago, but never tested it:)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3565/3395856518_233ea90623_b.jpg

[seansd]

Thanks for confirming the DG version issue. Here is my shot. I always do auto-bracketing in low light, works every single time :).

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_s5lC3_Zdg5k/SdBh_v5vLmI/AAAAAAAAAx8/GfCSxh8EUUc/s912/RESIZED_1126_4_5.jpg

Model - Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XSi
ExposureTime - 25 seconds, FNumber - 14.00, ISOSpeedRatings - 400, FocalLength - 81.00 mm

[LeuceDeuce]

Thanks for confirming the DG version issue. Here is my shot. I always do auto-bracketing in low light, works every single time :).

http://lh6.ggpht.com/_s5lC3_Zdg5k/SdBh_v5vLmI/AAAAAAAAAx8/GfCSxh8EUUc/s912/RESIZED_1126_4_5.jpg

Model - Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL XSi
ExposureTime - 25 seconds, FNumber - 14.00, ISOSpeedRatings - 400, FocalLength - 81.00 mm

Sean, there is a discontinued 70-300 from Sigma called the APO Macro Super II. You may have one of those if you don't see a DG on it.

[mortar]

I just received this lens from a POTN member. So far I'm very pleased with it. I can see it needs plenty of light but for the money that's what I expected.

[nakiboi]

Bought this lens yesterday, went for a play today and this is one of the shots i took.
Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 40D
Shooting Date/Time
4/24/2009 11:02:11
Tv(Shutter Speed)
1/640Sec.
Av(Aperture Value)
F20
Metering Modes
Evaluative metering
Exposure Compensation
0
ISO Speed
800
Lens
70-300mm
Focal Length
300.0 mm

[simonp1]

Hi great lens:)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3608/3429940612_a7e5033818_b.jpg

[mortar]

Couldn't get this duck to pick their head up they were way to busy eating.

Can anybody tell me what kind of duck this is? http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3499928798_0c8c9b1815_b.jpg

[mortar]

Another from the same day.

This guy didn't mind having his picture takin at all.


http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3344/3499145647_d1fac25020.jpg

[tab]

The duck is a female Mallard and the goose is a Greylag goose

[mortar]

Thanks, I knew what the goose was he was easy to find on the net.

What do the females ( Greylag) look like are they about the same?

The reason I ask he seemed to be hooked up with some type white goose that was nesting and he was very protective of her an the nest.

[KarlosDaJackal]

70mm - f/4 - 1/320 - iso400
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3417/3504880481_3976acde68_b.jpg

[LeuceDeuce]

Ducklings