Helo!

This tele is quite affordable (for me na kulang sa budget! hehe...). Im planning to get one.
Would need your advice guys if you have experience with this lens and if its a good one or would be a good buy. Your advice would sincerely be appreciated.

Thanks mucho!!!

i'm also interested on tis lens...

based on the reviews on the web, the most negative complaint is a weak/slow AF and noisy focusing since it's not HSM

sharpness is also an issue at wide open, but then that can be said of a lot of lenses...some have complained on backfocus at 200mm up

i tried it at JT the other week..did some sample shots and found it ok...weight is not really an issue - i feel the 70-200 2.8 was heavier....yes, it is noisy when it's focusing....yes, it was pretty slow AF, especially if the image is predominantly dark but if you are using for outdoor shoots at good sunlight i don't think that would be a problem

one thing i don't really like is the ridiculous length of the lens (plus hood) when at 400mm

i saw on the web some shots of an air show using this lens so i my statement above may have some merit

will probably get this lens soon and will post feedback once i am able to use it. i think at the present price of 29.5k it's a good buy. of course it cannot match the canon 100-400L but that sells for at least 73k

just got feedback from a user abroad and according to him, despite taking care of the lens for about three years, it lost sharpness....he didn't explain why

just got feedback from a user abroad and according to him, despite taking care of the lens for about three years, it lost sharpness....he didn't explain why

Hochi,

My guess is coatings wore off or faded. I have heard this from 2 pros way back (3 years ago, I think). They said, they always buy the same lens every 2 years because they started to lose sharpness or start flaring badly after 2 years of use. The only reason they got it because Sigma is cheap and after a year, it has paid for itself.

I think this is practical to an extent. Imagine buying a 24-70 sigma for P23k compared to a P60k canon. you would get almost 3 brand new lenses in 6 years for 1 canon lens. in fact, you can sell that lens for half the price again, and get a new one so you really are saving a lot of money in the process. At that rate, you are really getting a new lens for only P12k after the first 2 years. i just would wonder why the coatings would fade or wear off with sigma.

Tamron doesn't have that problem, nor Tokina as I know it. In fact, my Tamron became better in color through time(2.5 years with me till i sold it for the 24-105L.). And my tamron 17-35 still surprised me with its color and sharpness 2 months ago when i decide to use it after it was vactioning in the dry box for almost 2 years!


I'd take that with the sigma with a grain of salt, though these 2 guys were really serious about it. In any case, I am wary of Sigma. I often wondered why there are so many used copies for sale at Hidalgo compared to other brands. To me, that is a teltale sign of something not good. Maybe those guys were selling their stuff their after 2 years so there is a steady supply of their lenses in the market?

But of course, if you are happy with your copy, who am I to disprove anything?

Helo!

This tele is quite affordable (for me na kulang sa budget! hehe...). Im planning to get one.
Would need your advice guys if you have experience with this lens and if its a good one or would be a good buy. Your advice would sincerely be appreciated.

Thanks mucho!!!

This lens is not often discussed or asked for. Maybe it isn't that well regarded. if you want, you can substitute the sigma 50-500. It is well regarded and has a proven track record. it is a bit big though. But that is to be expected once you hit 400mm or 500mm. oh, it is very heavy too. :D

Or try the Tamron 200-500. But you have to order that specially from Henry's. It is lighter and smaller when collapsed.

Again, both these lenses don't have IS, and if you are shooting BIF, it AF may not be fast enough. If you are using canon dslr's, the best is really the 100-400L IS. I know you said you are in a budget, but if you can wait and save up for it, have no more regrets or other issues then best to get the 100-400L IS lens the first time out. Or you can wait for a used one. They usually go for P55k or even P50k in some instances. That's the price you would pay for a brand new sigma 50-500 anyway. I got my 100-400L IS 2nd hand.

i just would wonder why the coatings would fade or wear off with sigma.

yeah, it's really a downer...my 70-200 has lost part of it in the bottom rear portion of the lens and also on the base of the tripod collar....all in less than a year :Oops:

Thanks for the insights sirs hochi and mel. I decided to get the Nikon 70-300 AFS-VR. Nice lens, happy with it!