Nikon 70-300mm VR vs Sigma 70-300mm APO DG for a Nikon D7000
Asked 3/8/2011
1 views
2 answers
0
I’m choosing between the Nikon 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR and the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO DG for use on a Nikon D7000. I mainly want it for outdoor wildlife and some portraits, mostly handheld, though I may also use a tripod. Is the Nikon worth the extra cost over the Sigma, especially for sharpness, autofocus, and handheld shooting at the long end?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
4
- I have the Sigma 70-300mm APO DG.
- It's very soft in the 200-300mm range.
- I find myself constantly having to use high iso to get the needed shutter speed for hand held shots, whereas VR would help with this.
- It doesn't focus well compared to my other lens - its much slower (its not a USM type motor) and tends to hunt a bit.
- Shots lack contrast compared to my other lenses.
- Its relatively sharp under 200mm for portrait work, but for portraits nearly any 50 or 80mm prime is a better buy.
I'd look at the Nikon or even the new Tamron with VC that recently came out before I got this again. It feels like a steal of a deal at the price, but for me its not. If you're expecting sharp images in the 200-300 range (which you would want for wildlife shots), the Sigma isn't the lens for you.
Here's a sample from the Sigma, note that the feathers just don't look sharp.
Originally by user1917. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1917
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Based on the feedback provided, the Nikon 70-300mm VR is the better fit for your needs.
The Sigma 70-300mm APO DG was reported to be reasonably sharp below 200mm, but soft from 200-300mm, which is exactly the range that matters most for wildlife. Its autofocus was also described as slower and more prone to hunting, and images were said to have lower contrast.
For handheld outdoor shooting, Nikon’s VR is a meaningful advantage because it helps you use slower shutter speeds without camera shake. That won’t freeze subject movement, but it can make a big difference when shooting a long lens handheld. Since you mentioned wildlife and handheld use, that makes the Nikon the safer choice.
For portraits, either zoom can work, but if portraits become the priority, a fast prime is often a better option than a consumer telezoom.
So: for wildlife, handheld shooting, and better overall usability on a D7000, the Nikon is more worth the extra investment than the Sigma.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What are the practical differences between Nikon 18-105mm vs 16-85mm, and 55-300mm vs 70-300mm zooms?
Nikon D90 vs D7000 as an upgrade from a D80 for landscape and wildlife
Why does the Nikon 70-300mm AF-S VR cost much more than the 55-300mm AF-S DX VR?
Which budget telephoto lens is the best fit for a Nikon D5100: Nikon 70-300 VR, Nikon 55-300 VR, or Tamron 70-300?
Nikon DX telephoto zooms: AF-P 70-300mm VR vs AF-S 55-300mm VR