Well, as you can all tell from my post about the Nikon 70-300G lens, I'm looking for a tele-zoom for my D70 One alternative that I just saw out there is the Sigma version of this lense. What do you all think of the Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO "super". They seem to go in around the same price range as the Nikon G lens, but I dont' really know much about sigma lenses. Optically is it as good as the Nikkor glass? Should I even consider it, or just stick to the Nikon? The price is almost the same, so unless there's something abuot the Sigma equivalent that makes it any better, i'm gonna continue to hunt down a 70-300 ED Would like to hear some opinions from you guys that have experience with the Sigma hardware. Thanks in advance
Well, if it comes down to those two choices, I would go nikon. Increased compatibility with your camera bodies now and in the future.
However I notice that this is your first step up from the p&s world, and I 'get' that it is 'that' lens or 'no' lens, however honestly you might consider the Nikkor 50mm 1.8 This is some seriously sharp, fast, great color glass, that will hold its little value for longer than the cheapie zoom. I mean you can even put on teleconverters! I think overall it would be better to have a few fast lenses, then a plethora of slower ones.
I have the Sigma and have really enjoyed it. It is really sharp and also does a good job with macro work. However, like Daniel said, it's good to have at least one fast lens in the bag.
Here is a picture that I took with mine. It was shot on film and I scanned the print. It is not real good quality on the web, but the print is tack sharp.
Thanks scott for sharing that pic, it looks really good especially for a scan! I think it's gonna come down to which one i get the better price on albeit they're both pretty close in price The only thing that would lean me to the sigma over the nikon is the "macro" capability on the long end. not that i really ever shoot anything macro, but you know how it is... more "features" heh. i dunno, i guess it's a toss-up for me right now
Daniel,
the 50 1.8 is on my list, but the kit lense already covers me in that range right now, so i'm looking to at least get something on the long end while i can. my "budget" isn't going to bounce back for another couple months heheeh
I definetly agree with you guys on the fast lenses comment tho. I definitely don't want a bag full of slow lenses. this will just hold me over for a few months until i can get something like the 70-200 f/2.8. Now that's what i really want hehehe, but I won't swing that for a few more months anyway
Thanks guys for your replies I appreciate it I continue to sit basically right in the middle of the fence
Hmmm... I have pretty bad experiences with Signa 70-300. It's not quite sharp, colours are somehow desaturated... Macro capabilty is a big ... AF is dethly slow and inaccurate, noisy...
superfly,
cool, thanks for the input i figured the macro wouldn't be really something that i care about too much anyway have you used the nikon 70-300, can you offer a comparison ?
I havent actually try Nikkor, but my friend did it, and when I saw the pics I knew that it's lot better than Sigma. Luckily, i didn't buy Sigma, just borrow... so, I've decided to spend money on Nikkor and I suggest you to do the same.
You might also want to look at the slightly older 75-300mm f/4.5-5.6 AF. KEH has some new and used ones at good prices.
I picked a "Bargain" grade one up from KEH a few months ago for only $109 with caps - and don't let the "Bargain" fool you, this lens looked absolutely perfect. It's easily better than the Sigma 70-300 (A friend of mine got the Sigma for his D100 - I'm also shooting a D100, as well as an N90s).
I was debating whether to get the Nikon 70-300G AF, or splash out and go straight for the 70-300D-ED AF. It was suggested that I check out the 75-300mm, and I'm glad I did.
And yeah, like superfly says the "Macro" on the Sigma lens means nothing. The two 70-300's both focus as close as each other, and get the same magnification.
But, like I said, check out the 75-300mm too. I couldn't be happier with mine. This will do me just perfect until I can afford the 80-400 VR
I got my D70 a few months ago and picked up the Sigma 70-300 because I wanted some long glass and it was what I could afford. I have been struggling for some time to get consistently good shots out of it. Here is what I have found, It is very soft at 300. If you have to shoot long with the aperture open all the way, don't even bother. I can get reasonable results if I have plenty of light and pay close attention to what I am doing. On the up-side it is forcing me to work harder at my shots and breaking me of some of the bad habits my CP 4500 point and shoot taught me. The down side is you have to have perfect conditions to get a good shot at full zoom. It is NOT forgiving. I have a buddy who lent me his Nikon 70-300 and in limited experimentation I am seeing quite similar results.
I just picked up a Nikon 75-300mm AF; I'm still just learning to use my D70, but this lens rocks. I'll be shooting a lot of the 4th of July festivities tonight with it.
I got mine for $150 at a typical tourist "ripoff" camera place; it was in the wrong box and, naturally, came with no warranty, but it hasn't ever been used and works just fine. It's built like a brick and feels great. The AF is nowhere near as fast as the D70 kit lens, but it's tolerable thanks to the AF range-limiter.
I'm a beyond-newbie amateur, so I can't comment [yet] on color or distortion, but it Takes A Great Picture. Here for (some) more details:
Jimmy, I'll be doing exacly the same thing as you this evening... Only, i'll be using a D100 instead of the D70.
Yup, the AF is slow, but you're right, that limiter sure helps. I've always got the limiter set to the 10ft-infinity range. I'm rarely shooting this lens within 10ft, so it does speed it up.
One alternative that I just saw out there is the Sigma version of this lense. What do you all think of the Sigma 70-300 f/4-5.6 APO "super". They seem to go in around the same price range as the Nikon G lens, but I dont' really know much about sigma lenses. Optically is it as good as the Nikkor glass? Should I even consider it, or just stick to the Nikon? The price is almost the same, so unless there's something abuot the Sigma equivalent that makes it any better, i'm gonna continue to hunt down a 70-300 ED 
I think overall it would be better to have a few fast lenses, then a plethora of slower ones.
and I suggest you to do the same.