Best bang for the buck 70-300 for D80

[X-SOFT]

any suggestions?

[philwojo]

Not sure what the question is really?

Are you asking what is the best 70-300 lens for a D80 in terms of quality vs. price?

Or are you asking if the 70-300 is the best lens for the D80?

Or are you asking something else?

Phil

[DonSchap]

You might want to wait and grab onto the brand new TAMRON AF28-300mm f3.5-6.3 VC Di LD lens when it is released. It becomes effectively a 42-450mm lens on the Nikon ... has anti-sh-sh-shake and added that lower focal width.


21783

[britkev]

It's pretty much generally agreed that the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG is the best of the "budget" long zooms - sells for a little over $200 at reputable online dealers. Nikon's new 70-300 VR looks really nice but is significantly more expensive (~$500).

[K1W1]

+1 for the Sigma.
In terms of bank for buck it can't be beaten. It is a budget lens and other lenses will produce better images in some circumstances but you can't beat the price / performance ratio of this lens for most users.

[Rooz]

save your money and buy the 70-300VR over the others.
it is outstanding.

[lightinsky]

I'm eying the sigma 70-300 lens, given all the good feedback. I've never shoot tele before, so have a couple of questions...

What is the standard min shutter speed for handheld shots at both range of the lens? I understand generally its about 1/60... but shooting at the tele end change this?

also, in another thread, someone shot with VR at 1/2 s at the tele end, can't rem if its 200 or 300... but this is bloody damn impressive... so I've thinking of going for the VR instead...

So IF I shoot at fast shutter speeds (good lighting)... what other difference would there be between a VR and non-VR???

[britkev]

The rule-of-thumb for hand-holding is that you want a shutter speed at least as fast as 1/focal length... so at 300mm you are looking for 1/300th or faster... since most of the affordable zooms are f/5.6 at that length you need a fairly bright day and/or bump up your ISO. By bracing yourself or resting the camera on something solid you can probably get away with 1/250 or even 1/125... 1/60th is probably going to get you a bunch of rejects due to motion blur.

VR claims to give you a 3 or 4 stop advantage, so maybe 1/30th is workable... any slower and you're going to need some luck as well, and of course VR does nothing to stop the action if your subject is moving.

[K1W1]

I have got acceptable photos as low as 1/125 sec at 300mm hand held with the Sigma but they are exceptions rather than rules. Generally I try for something faster than 1/320 sec and use the aperture and / or ISO to get the speed acceptable in low light conditions.
The 1/focal length rule is handy to know about be you should not adhere to it like a slave because it comes from the old days when a 300mm lens weighed probably three times what a current DX 300mm lens weighs.
For faster shutter speed shots the VR in the VR lens is probably having a marginal affect. The real difference is the faster focusing and better quality glass. What you pay for in lenses is the quality of the glass and the focussing mechanism above all else.

[coldrain]

Actually, the rule of thumb is not based on weight of a lens (the heavier the lens (upto a certain point) the more stable you can hold it anyway.

It is based on that with a very narrow field of view, with abit of shake the optical axis in relation to the projected image will move a LOT, in comparison to a wider view. So, the more tele you go, the narrower the field of view, the bigger the movement of the optical axis will be, and the shorter the exposure time has to be.

You do have to take the crop factor into account too, so 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm. The shutter time should be 1/450th sec for realiable non camera shake blurred photos.

This of course differs from person to person, some are easily able to use shorter exposure times, others will need help already. It is just a rule of thumb, not an exact law.

[tcadwall]

CR beat me to the crop-factor mention.

VR really will help, even at faster shutter speeds when your subject is not moving. If you need a particular shot, and want to make sure it is as sharp as the lens is capable, you cannot lose to put it on a tripod - VR or Not. But VR will help you if you can't / won't carry a tripod. Actually the nice little ML-L3 will also help if you have the camera on a tripod.

[X-SOFT]

actually, in my camera i use shutter speeds about 1\125 a sec. so as i read from the other posts, i think i wont need VR..

but the image quality is very different?

[coldrain]

actually, in my camera i use shutter speeds about 1\125 a sec. so as i read from the other posts, i think i wont need VR..

but the image quality is very different?

Of course you will need VR if you are going to shoot 300mm x 1.5 = 450mm.
You would need at least 1/400 sec, 1/125 is a lot longer...

[X-SOFT]

strange what you saying because i have Canon poweshot A710 IS, and i didnt have camera shake from 1\40. [i've done internal tests with and without ths IS option]

so how come this will affect it?

[Prospero]

strange what you saying because i have Canon poweshot A710 IS, and i didnt have camera shake from 1\40. [i've done internal tests with and without ths IS option]

so how come this will affect it?

If you did your tests at the wide end of the zoom, 35 mm, I guess, than 1/40th secon should be handholdable. The long end of the zoom of your camera will probably be around 100mm, so 1/40th second would be tough to handhold. If you are able to do that, you have pretty steady hands.

Like Coldrain said, you can usually handhold the camera at a shutterspeed of 1 divided by the apparant focal length (the focal lenght when taking the crop factor into account). So, with a ultrawide 10mm lens you can handhold from speeds of 1/15th and faster and with a 300 lens 1/450th second. Of course these values differ from person to person. I shoot regularly at 1/300th second with my 70-300 without camera shake.

[X-SOFT]

i did it in full tele (X6~210mm) at iso 80, and it didnt blured.
so, at d80 which it is a DSLR, i can shoot even at iso 800 and i will have the image like in canon a710 [iso perfomance is great in D80], so i suppose it will be ok- isnt it?

my main concern, as i stated before, is the image quality..

[Prospero]

i did it in full tele (X6~210mm) at iso 80, and it didnt blured.
so, at d80 which it is a DSLR, i can shoot even at iso 800 and i will have the image like in canon a710 [iso perfomance is great in D80], so i suppose it will be ok- isnt it?

my main concern, as i stated before, is the image quality..

So you shot at 210mm without image stabilisation and did not get blur until 1/40th second. Do you have a pulse?? :D

Seriously, though, having VR can really come in handy. It will give you some flexibility in less than ideal light, which may allow lower ISO (ISO 800 may be great, but ISO 200 is much better still) or allows you to stop down the lens to get more depth of field if required.

Thus, with the 70-300VR you will get better image quality than with the Sigma. The Nikkor lens is also sharper than the Sigma.

[X-SOFT]

yeah, but more than 3 times higher cost (in my country).
it is very costly for me..

so i think i'll buy the sigma 70-300..

but i keep wondering if the 28-300 or the 18-200 [and the new 18-250 that is coming soon] are better than two lenses in termes of quality, speed and ect:
18-70 and 70-300?

any advice?

[Prospero]

yeah, but more than 3 times higher cost (in my country).
it is very costly for me..

so i think i'll buy the sigma 70-300..

but i keep wondering if the 28-300 or the 18-200 [and the new 18-250 that is coming soon] are better than two lenses in termes of quality, speed and ect:
18-70 and 70-300?

any advice?

If you cannot afford it, I would go for the Sigma. I own the lens myself and am happy with it. It is reasonably sharp, if I use the unsharp mask I can always get the results as sharp as I want them to be. The apperture is not great for low light, but in cloudy days still good enough (so I can use it without going to high ISO). The focussing is slow, but accurate. Here the Nikkor would be much better due to af-s focussing. Finally, the macro mode is great.

All in all, a great lens for the money.

It outperforms any of the 18-200s in the tele range. The 18-200 are nice walk around lenses, but they are compromised due to the extreme range. Also, the 18-200 of both Sigma and Tamron only go to 150 or 160mm if they are not focussed on infinity.

[Rooz]

So you shot at 210mm without image stabilisation and did not get blur until 1/40th second. Do you have a pulse?? :D .

pisses you off don;t it ? lol
my other nikon buddy can shoot at 200mm,(with VR), at 1 second with no noticeable blur without leaning on anything. i mean thats just outstanding...not outstanding enuf for me to give up alcohol and coffee though.:D

[Prospero]

pisses you off don;t it ? lol
my other nikon buddy can shoot at 200mm,(with VR), at 1 second with no noticeable blur without leaning on anything. i mean thats just outstanding...not outstanding enuf for me to give up alcohol and coffee though.:D

Wow, that means he would be able to shoot 1/8th to 1/16th second without VR at 200mm. That's indeed amazing.
Your right though, I would rather use a tripod than give up beer :D.

[britkev]

The "rule-of-thumb" is just that - doesn't mean that every shot you shoot slower than 1/focal length is going to be a disaster... you can quite often get away with one or two stops slower, but the slower you go the higher your reject rate is going to be

[X-SOFT]

so as a conclusion, i should 70-300 and 18-70 Sigma right?

[T06]

Wow, that means he would be able to shoot 1/8th to 1/16th second without VR at 200mm. That's indeed amazing.
Your right though, I would rather use a tripod than give up beer :D.

.....maybe we should start a thread on VR with a stubbie rating:D :D :D

[tcadwall]

X-Soft... Anyone that really cares, and understands that everyone is on their OWN budget, is not going to tell you what you SHOULD buy. We will hopefully help you see the differences from our different perspectives. Hopefully we can help you avoid a mistake, but ultimately the choice is yours, and the only way this board works, is if people are respectful enough to realize that your lens choice is a result of YOUR personal choice of compromise between quality and price - based on YOUR needs. There is ALWAYS a compromise. If you aren't compromising on price, you will still be compromising between other factors... For instance, you might end up getting 15 primes, and end up missing important shots while you are changing lenses!!!!

ALWAYS a compromise.

[X-SOFT]

no. i meant reletivly to other makers like nikkor and tamron in that price range and lens XXmm , are sigma the best?

[coldrain]

no. i meant reletivly to other makers like nikkor and tamron in that price range and lens XXmm , are sigma the best?
As said before, the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 APO DG Macro is better than the competing Nikon and Tamron models.

The Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4.5 Macro has no Tamron equivalent, and it is more or less comparable to the Nikon 18-70. It has less barrel distortion at 18mm, has a macro mode which allows you to get closer to the subject, and it doesnt have the zoom and focus rings mixed up. The Nikon has the silent AF-S motor.

It is up to you choose.

[longroad]

I just bought the Nikkor 70-300mm VR
The zoom was amazing when I tested in store, I could see right across the other side of the shopping centre (then again I've never used such a large zoom so perhaps Im easily impressed).
Cant wait to try this baby out on my new D80 :D

This lens isn't overly expensive, I can't see why you'd go with an alternative brand when the Nikkor is quite affordable in this case (shame the same cant be said for the 12-24mm...)

[THANG0359]

does this sigma lense have VR capabilities and what does Sigma and tamron call their "Image stabilization" technology?

thanks,
La

[Prospero]

No, this lens does not have sigma's optical stabilisation system (OS)

The cheapest lens Sigma makes with OS is the new 18-200 OS. They also have an 80-400 OS and some more expensive telelenses with OS.