Sigma 70-300 APO MACRO DG F/4-5,6 Review

posted on 12th of may, 2008
>Hi guys, it's my first article, I hope you to appreciate it. So, let's talk about this lens.
Many amateur photographers before or later come to buy this lens: it's cheap, and several websites state it to be an excellent compromise by adding a (relatively) good quality image to a very low price (don't really know how much it costs in USA... here you can find it at about 150 dollars, new).
I used it a lot, in the past on the EOS 350D, and now on my 40D, and I think I know very well this lens to help you out in the case you are interested with it.
So, let's come to the quality image, that's the most important thing in a lens: well, it varies from very good, from 70 and 135 mm, to good from 135 and 200, to become almost horrendous over 230 mm. 300 mm are almost useless. At 300 mm, this lens produces very...

[ Read more... ]
Comments (4)

Posted by Valeria73 on June 27, 2008
Very very interesting!!! Thanks Luca!
Posted by Bigpressphoto on May 14, 2008
thanks for the info, Im looking for a new lens i think ill wait and get a good nikkor when i have money.
good reviewD
Posted by MinervaStudio on May 13, 2008
Thank you Rob =)

This article has been read 5011 times. 1 readers have found this article useful.

Tamron 17-50 F/2,8 Review

posted on 19th of may, 2008
>So, I assume you've bought a DSLR and now you are disappointed by the 18-55 kit lens that comes with your camera.
This is mostly true speaking of Canon kit lens, but anyway Nikkor kit lens, though being a much better lens, may be not what you were looking for, in terms of quality.
So, it's time to upgrade to a better lens that has near the same focal range.
Well, there are many options: if you decided for Canon, you may take a look at the 17-40 F/4 L, while if you have chosen Nikon you could be interested in a VR lens. But it will cost you a lot, you're advised.
So, where can you find good quality for little price? Here's where Tamron 17-50 F/2,8 comes into play.
Let's take a look at this product.
Firstly, the focal range is almost the same: you lose something in the tele-range, but you earn an...

[ Read more... ]
Comments (3)

Posted by Fjord on May 24, 2008
I am using this lens too. I think it is good but not good as the Canon lens. At most time the center is greatly sharp, but the boken and the border is not so good. The most thing that trouble me is that the quality control is very poor. So when I use it I always want change the 16-35L. But the price of it is much more lower than Canon lens.
Posted by Sil63 on May 20, 2008
I really enjoyed reading your review as I need to buy a good lens with 2.8 aperture, one day or another :) I was considering the Sigma as well but it does not have a constant aperture... Thank you for sharing! Ciao!
Posted by Linqong on May 19, 2008
Tamron 17-50 F/2, 8, it is a very good lens! Especially the users of Canon select it for use, the result is better. The above is my own opinion.

This article has been read 7320 times. 3 readers have found this article useful.
About Me

confidential info
September (1)
July (1)
    Search the blogs!
Latest articles (RSS 2.0 )
  Rate my portfolio
  Seriously, how is Dreamstime's situation?
  Sale number 2000 on DT!
  Sale number 1000!
  Over 2.000 in portfolio!
  Canon 24-105 F/4 L USM IS review
  Meet Cecilia
  My collections
  Canon EF 70-200 F/4 L USM Review
  Canon EF 17-40 F/4 L Review

Create your own blog in seconds...
My favourite articles
More favorite articles

Related image searches

tamron lens review 17-50 versatility

Versatility related stock images