My Impression: Sigma 70-300 APO DG Macro

I just bought a copy of this lens from Dorman. I'll be getting it soon.

I'll be using it temporarily until I get the 70-200 F4L (I'm waiting for the IS to come out, so I can see the prices, and well, I'm expecting a lot of regular 70-200 F4L'S to come up for sale so I can get one local or cheaper then the $5xx USD they are going for now.)

I began to think, and I think i'll keep this lens even after I get the 70-200 F4L as a lens to use like the kit lens (which by that I mean a lens that I can take with me when I am going out and not doing that much serious photography.) It is light, and if I get it damaged or something I won't be upset, and it won't cost so much to fix it as it's a cheaper lens .

Don't know about you, but given similar price point, better optics beats quieter AF noise, every time. If you are busy taking shots, you'll forget the AF sound as it seems like you are learning.

Time and time again, the Sigma tests well against other consumer grade 70-300 on those British mags.

Tee Why wrote in post #2057958
Don't know about you, but given similar price point, better optics beats quieter AF noise, every time. If you are busy taking shots, you'll forget the AF sound as it seems like you are learning.

Time and time again, the Sigma tests well against other consumer grade 70-300 on those British mags.

no doubt. That's why I decided to get the Sigma instead of the EF 75/100 - 300 lenses. I read in one of the British mags that the Sigma and Tamron are the best of the budget telephotos with the Sigma slightly beating the Tamron.

It's a great lens for the money. I have the non-apo version. As long as you can stop up, you get very good quality.

if the motor noisy is too much of a problem, why not bring an iPod and cover ur ear with some music? Just kidding... very nice photo tho. I'd like to have a 300mm lens too.

mr_sub wrote in post #2059445
if the motor noisy is too much of a problem, why not bring an iPod and cover ur ear with some music? Just kidding... very nice photo tho. I'd like to have a 300mm lens too.

It only bothers me if I am sneaking up to an unsuspecting small animal like squirrels, chipmunks, birds, Paris Hilton...

I want to sell it, but i don't know who in this world will think to buy it.

Tareq wrote in post #2061685
I want to sell it, but i don't know who in this world will think to buy it.

Well I just sold mine to JaGwIre, surely someone would buy it from you but in your situation international shipping might make it not worth while. Keep it, it fits into your collection of every EF mount lens ever made.

Tareq wrote in post #2061685
I want to sell it, but i don't know who in this world will think to buy it.

Why? Even if it's not the greatest lens, it's cheap, and light, good lens to just whip on and take with you when your in a rush and going somewhere you don't want to have the most expensive lens on incase you touch something or whatever.

JaGWiRE wrote in post #2061929
Why? Even if it's not the greatest lens, it's cheap, and light, good lens to just whip on and take with you when your in a rush and going somewhere you don't want to have the most expensive lens on incase you touch something or whatever.

I agree with both of you.
in fact my 70-200 is most used than this Sigma, but i like to keep it, just my friend told me that i have to sell as soon fast as possible before the price going more down because he told me that i will not use it after all that canon lenses, it is cheap indeed to keep it, bu i don't know if it is a right way to sell it.
in All cases there are 2 lesnes i want to sell for sure no doubt.

I think the only things the 70-200 f4 L has over the Sigma are quicker focus and a non-rotating front element.

With static shots I don't think there's much between them but with sports shots the focus speed of the Canon puts it out in front.

NordieBoy wrote in post #2062711
I think the only things the 70-200 f4 L has over the Sigma are quicker focus and a non-rotating front element.

With static shots I don't think there's much between them but with sports shots the focus speed of the Canon puts it out in front.

Exactly

Tareq wrote in post #2062344
I agree with both of you.
in fact my 70-200 is most used than this Sigma, but i like to keep it, just my friend told me that i have to sell as soon fast as possible before the price going more down because he told me that i will not use it after all that canon lenses, it is cheap indeed to keep it, bu i don't know if it is a right way to sell it.
in All cases there are 2 lesnes i want to sell for sure no doubt.

I'm planning to get a 70-200, but figure I should wait until the IS comes out. Then I'm sure a lot of local deals will pop up for the 70-200 F4L and maybe even 70-200 F2.8 Sigma. Maybe I'm crazy, but I would think a few guys will sell their F4's and buy the IS version (I won't cause I think $600-700 more for IS is nuts, for that price I'll hire somebody to carry a Tripod around for me .)

Nice lens, the AF noise wouldnt bother me so long as the optics are good, this lens looks pretty unbeatable at that price.

Nick

NordieBoy wrote in post #2062711
I think the only things the 70-200 f4 L has over the Sigma are quicker focus and a non-rotating front element.

With static shots I don't think there's much between them but with sports shots the focus speed of the Canon puts it out in front.

If I am into sports shots, I wouldn't even consider the F4L. Too slow aperture wise. Gotta get the f2.8 brother or the Sigma version.