Dec 12, 2008, 17:53
I was going to buy the Nikkor version for close to 700 dollars but saved over $200 purchasing the Sigma. The lens is very light. The motor is a little noiser than the Nikkor and the turning mechanisms seem a little stiffer. The lens is surpriringly small and light, even though it is longer than the 55-200 mm Nikkor when extended--or seems so. It has an additional extension out of the tube for the longer focal lengths. The segments have visal scares to mark focal lengths. The optics look very good to me and the lens has a macro potential focussing down to about 6 inches. You have to use the manual focus when you focus in that close because the autofocus seems to search forever, but it does focus fine.
The best part is that my Nikon has the same capability as my point and shoot Kodak and I don't have to make decisions about every day use lenses. I can carry my Sigma 10-20 mm lens with me in my small case and have my whole photographic range. I've only had the lens a few hours but I feel like the cat who swallowed the canary.
The best part is that my Nikon has the same capability as my point and shoot Kodak and I don't have to make decisions about every day use lenses. I can carry my Sigma 10-20 mm lens with me in my small case and have my whole photographic range. I've only had the lens a few hours but I feel like the cat who swallowed the canary.
Nikon D3100 with Tokina 28-70mm f3.5, (I like to use a Vivitar .43x aux on the 28-70mm Tokina), Nikkor 10.5 mm fisheye, Quanteray 70-300mm f4.5, ProOptic 500 mm f6.3 mirror lens. http://donschaefferphoto.blogspot.com/