Picking up a Sigma 70-300mm APO for $30 later today!

Disclaimer: I want a cheap telephoto, I don't have a lot of experience in the telephoto range and just want to get some trigger time and something I'd feel comfortable using at track days and stuff without caressing it the entire time.

I am gunna pick up a Sigma 70-300mm w/ Macro later today for $30. Cons: AF is broken on the lens (motor turns but does not engage), and it can only shoot wide-open on digital EOS cameras I guess due to it being the gold-ring variant (can someone confirm and explain that for me). And no OS/IS, didn't come with that model.

Basically I'm just sharing looking for input, I know I am going to hate trying capture any action with no AF. But luckily I want to shoot cars, which are on a track, so I can time it for when they are going through my focal range.

Any other things I will be swearing about once I get it?

I would have gone for the 55-250mm myself. They can be had for dirt cheap these days. For telephoto you would need IS and functioning AF would definitely help.

was considering that originally until I found this one. I hadn't found anyone selling 55-250 for under 100 (and rarely below 130), so I figured, 1/3 the price will at least keep me from **** about not having those features.

A while back, I was looking for an inexpensive super-telephoto and bought an old Sigma 150-500mm that didn't work with my Canon's electronic aperture controls.

The bottom line was that the thin depth of field produced mediocre photos if the focus was off even just a little bit. I could get similar quality by just cropping shots from a shorter lens.

But I learned a little about depth of field, so it wasn't a total waste of time. Take a look at this calculator:
http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html

If the cars are 75 feet away, everything within 73.4 feet and 76.6 feet will be in reasonable focus but anything closer or further will be slightly out of focus. (Assuming 300mm at f/4.5.) So, it's going to be a challenge to focus and time your shots. You could better your odds by pre-focusing at an approximated distance and then shooting into a group of cars. Something is bound to be in focus, even if it's not the car your intended!

So, yeah, I know where you're coming from, having gone through the same thought process. Just keep your expectations low and don't risk any important photos until you've tested the new lens.

that dofmaster is awesome! Great tool, appreciate the link. Definitely shows how much of a pain it will be not being able to stop down or AF, I guess I was a little on the hopefully side but it's not far off what I was expecting.

Definitely not planning on getting prints or using it for any work stuff, I know I get what I pay for, I feel like this is just good practice and personal test, I probably am just gunna sit on my front porch and try to catch cars as they drive by a lot for the first day or 2. (practicing pre-focusing and using set points to shoot was my plan to begin with).

My question to you is how much trouble was it for you insure a sharp focus when you had either a pre-set focus wit a subject passing through, or even an inanimate object not moving at a long distance away. I foresee my biggest blunder that I will think I am in focus and consistently being just far enough out to look like garbage. I'm planning to do tripod+live view x10 to establish focus then using view finder when actually shooting.

I know you said you don't have a lot of money, but wasting $30 on a lens you won't want to use just seems like a good way to stay broke longer. There are used copies of this and other cheap telephotos that go for under $100 all the time. Manually focusing a 300mm lens without stabilization and a dark f5.6 viewfinder seems like an exercise in frustration - especially when you are trying to track action!

tkbslc wrote in post #11571401
I know you said you don't have a lot of money, but wasting $30 on a lens you won't want to use just seems like a good way to stay broke longer. There are used copies of this and other cheap telephotos that go for under $100 all the time.

my plan is to use it as a way of improving my abilities and forcing myself to be persistent and meticulous. Eventually I will sell it and upgrade. And it's not so much that I am indefinitely broke, I just need to recover from holiday spending and can't afford to buy myself any toys for at least a month. And I currently have no professional need for a telephoto (I do event videography and I'm slowly transitioning to my T2i for more work stuff), so I don't want to drop any money on something I am getting for pure hobby when I need to get other lenses and equipment to make the T2i more viable for work related tasks.

So just wait a bit and get something you can enjoy using. Would you rather buy junk today or a decent lens in the future?

natums wrote in post #11571353
... My question to you is how much trouble was it for you insure a sharp focus when you had either a pre-set focus wit a subject passing through, or even an inanimate object not moving at a long distance away. ...

My autofocus worked but, with the lens wide open, it was still tough shooting moving subjects. You'll probably get a decent shot or two but the "keeper rate" will be very low.

If you can find a used 50mm f/1.8 for $60 or so, you'll have a lot of fun experimenting with it and probably end up keeping it for video use.

I found a *hardly* used one for about 80$, Looks OK but definitely not better than the 55-250 IS. Anyway, go for it only if you want the reach to 300mm, Its a decent lens to start with though..

Few pics from my Sigma 70-300..

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/teananth/tags/s​igma

Got it a couple hrs ago and have been shooting with it while I ran around (working, errands, fun). Enjoyed shooting with it, definitely have a low 'keeper' rate, as expected, but I was surprised how easily I would get something first try. Then I would always try it again and it would be out of focus or I would move too much.

first impressions: 300mm is really long! heavier than I expected but I don't have much experience with SLR telephotos, for some reason I expected this one to feel light but it doesn't. Focus and zoom rings are both real smooth! No IS is a ****, if I start shooting telephoto more seriously I definitely need a monopod. Lens cap is my least favorite part, doesn't grip the lens as tightly as I had hoped and is hard to squeeze the feet to take it off. I noticed while previewing on camera I don't feel like it gets very good saturation or contrast unless it's tuned in just right, but could be just trying to preview it in broad daylight.

ananth, you got some great pics with it, did you intentionally not have high saturation in several shots or does this lens just finnicky when it comes to color and contrast like I was noticing? I'm assuming the beetles are at 300mm macro, very awesome, I am looking forward to using that feature more.

Copying photos to my comp now, lets see how they go...

For $30 I think you can have a lot of fun at track days with it. Use Live View to focus on a particular spot, and then just shoot there, either panning or with a tripod. With a fast enough shutter speed (and there's usually plenty of light at the tracks I go to) I think you'll really like some of the images. And 300mm on a crop will get you the magnification you need.

Sure the lack of OS and AF will be limiting, but you'll figure out what you can and can't do.

Here are some of the shots I took through the day, remember all were wide open aperture and manual focus. All handheld except the Red Bull shot.

First 2 shots as I walked away from buying it:

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Redirected to error image by FLICKR

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/natums/53270212​94/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/natums/53264137​91/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/natums/53264146​23/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/natums/53270222​68/

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/natums/53270218​56/