# Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6G or SIGMA 70-300MM F4-5.6 DG MACRO NIKON



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 14, 2008)

Which one should i get whats better? Nikon one or sigma one ( sorry for noob terms) the nikon one is 140$ and the sigma is 130$ so price difference is minimal. Btw it's going on a d40 if that  makes a difference.


----------



## reg (Dec 14, 2008)

I believe neither of them will autofocus...

Do they have AF-S?


----------



## Overread (Dec 14, 2008)

If you go for the sigma get the APO  edition - the APO coatings on the glass will give a noticable improvment in quality over the older edition of the lens.
Myself I would say of the two - go for the sigma. The macro feature is worth it to play around with and can be quite (very)addictive. Note that its not full macro, you won't get blindingly close insect shots, but you can get very good photography of things like the opened head of a flower or other things roughly that size.
At this price range both are going to be softer at the long (300mm) end and both would benefit greatly from being used from a tripod setup (even a cheap tripod - the added stability really helps with these lenses)


----------



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 14, 2008)

Overread said:


> If you go for the sigma get the APO edition - the APO coatings on the glass will give a noticable improvment in quality over the older edition of the lens.
> Myself I would say of the two - go for the sigma. The macro feature is worth it to play around with and can be quite (very)addictive. Note that its not full macro, you won't get blindingly close insect shots, but you can get very good photography of things like the opened head of a flower or other things roughly that size.
> At this price range both are going to be softer at the long (300mm) end and both would benefit greatly from being used from a tripod setup (even a cheap tripod - the added stability really helps with these lenses)


 
The *SIGMA 70-300MM F4-5.6 DG MACRO NIKON* APO edition is $200 is it really worth the extra $70?


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Dec 14, 2008)

Neither, get the 55-200 instead so you'll have AF.


----------



## Overread (Dec 14, 2008)

I would say it is yes - unless you are planning to replace the lens with better models in the near future then I would definaty say spend the extra.
However if Reg is right (and I think he is) then not having AF is going to be a major limitation - especailly considering that DSLRs are not the easiest to manually focus on (compared to the film SLRs).
I would check this out before purchasing and if you lose AF consider looking around for alternative lenses is possible. I can't offer any since I am not a Nikon shooter and simply don't know alternatives -- like what Sw1tch just suggested


----------



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 14, 2008)

Sw1tchFX said:


> Neither, get the 55-200 instead so you'll have AF.


 
Apparently it does autofocus

http://nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?m=14448&disp=Specs


----------



## reg (Dec 14, 2008)

AnthonyCorbo said:


> Apparently it does autofocus
> 
> http://nikon.ca/en/Product.aspx?m=14448&disp=Specs



Not on a D40


----------



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 14, 2008)

reg said:


> Not on a D40


  Oh,ok thanks for telling me


----------



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 14, 2008)

So the 55-200mm VR Lenses is the best choice?


----------



## TUX424 (Dec 14, 2008)

AnthonyCorbo said:


> So the 55-200mm VR Lenses is the best choice?


I would agree with that, 55-200 VR nice cheap VR nikon made lens cant really do better for the price that will AF with the D40


----------



## Zach (Dec 18, 2008)

Sw1tchFX said:


> Neither, get the 55-200 instead so you'll have AF.


 

From my understanding the Sigma will AF with any Nikon.

Sigma - Lenses


----------



## ANDS! (Dec 18, 2008)

I was going to agree with the VR recommendation, but it seems - despite not having the HSM designation - that the Sigma 70-300 has a built in motor on the lens.

However, the Sigma is not a true Macro, as it can only focus up to 1:2 on its own. at a distance of about three feet no less.  Still, it'll get you closer than most other zooms could possible muster.


----------



## hankejp (Dec 18, 2008)

I bought the Sigma 70-300 a couple months ago.  It seems to be a decent lens.  If you go with this one, make sure it has the HSM motor.  This is the one that will AF with the D40.  I have quite a few photos on my picasa site that were taken with the 70-300.  I believe all the winter ones were as well as the airplane.  Feel free to take a look.


----------



## AnthonyCorbo (Dec 18, 2008)

So the sigma does have an internal autofocus? it will autofocus with my d40?


----------



## hankejp (Dec 18, 2008)

AnthonyCorbo said:


> So the sigma does have an internal autofocus? it will autofocus with my d40?


 
If you buy one with their HSM motor. I got the one with the HSM motor, which is built into the lens. Works pretty good. It can be a little loud once in a while, but not bad at all.


http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08013106sigma70300hsm.asp

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/549304-REG/Sigma_5A8306_70_300mm_f_4_5_6_APO_DG.html#features


----------

