Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG Review

According provided by Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG lens (motorless version for Nikon cameras) is huge thanks to the store you can find a huge number of different used photographic equipment, including similar lenses for Nikon cameras.

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG. Enlarge photo.

In short

This review shows the Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG version - one of the latest modifications - DG APO Macro 14/10 with 3 SLD elements, without focusing motor for Nikon cameras.

In the review, I already had several similar lenses. In this review, I will only point out the differences between the Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG version (from this review) and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER:

  1. DL MACRO SUPER older.
  2. lenses are based on the same optical design with 14 elements in 10 groups, but DL MACRO SUPER uses only one low dispersion Sigma SLD element, while the APO DG version uses three.
  3. different body design. APO DG has a characteristic Sigma velvet body coating and a red bezel to the will of the focus ring, which the version does not have DL MACRO SUPER. The red bezel is typical for Sigma APO lenses. There are also minor changes in the style of the design of the cases (corrugation of erasers, markers and inscriptions, etc., clearly visible in the pictures below).
  4. different enlightenment. In the APO DG version, the enlightenment is optimized for working with digital cameras, DL MACRO SUPER - with film.
  5. APO DG creates a better image. The difference is very easy to notice, especially with regard to sharpness.
Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG and Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER


There are a huge variety of various modifications, versions and subversions of Sigma class 70 (75) -300 mm lenses (approximately 13 versions).

The reasons for this wide variety are:

  1. Continuous lens improvement. For example, older versions designed for film cameras have been updated for better compatibility with digital cameras. Marking versions optimized for digital cameras includes the prefix 'DG'(latest versions from this line - DG, Apo dg, OS DG) First of all, the updates concerned enlightenment.
  2. Improvement of lenses by increasing the number of low dispersion elements Sigma SLD (Special Low Dispersion). Sigma lenses with 14/11 and 14/10 optical designs may have different numbers of SLD elements. An increased number of SLDs can be recognized using the prefix APO (apochromat) and red decorative ring. The APO 14/11 version has 1 SLD element more than the NON-APO version. The APO 14/10 versions have 2 SLD elements more than the same NON-APO versions.
  3. Non-observance of unitary marking for lenses with different mounts. So, for example, for Nikon cameras, some 70-300 Sigma lenses in their name written on the housing may include the additional letter 'D'(indicates the possibility of transferring the focusing distance to the camera). Also, the same version / sub-version for cameras of different systems can have a different style of its name on the body (for example, different parts of the name can be written in golden letters). Over time, the same version / subversion could change the location and method of applying name markers on your case.
  4. Most likely the versions of Macro Super, Macro Super II, unlike earlier models, have the ability to macro in the range of 200-300 mm. Earlier models had this mode only at 300 mm focal length.
  5. Improvement of lenses with body design changes... There are so-called 'second' lens sub-versions, for example DL Macro Super -> DL Macro Super II, APO Macro Super -> APO Macro Super II. Identification is complicated by the fact that there is no 'II' indication on the case, the 'II' mark is found only on the box and / or instructions. Such subversions can be distinguished the width of the focus ring, newer versions have a focus ring that is smaller in diameter than a zoom ring. There are also versions with a velvet-coated housing.
  6. In 2008, the DG and DG APO for Nikon cameras are updated to sub-versions with a built-in focus motor. New versions with a built-in focus motor do not have an aperture control ring, and number of microprocessor contacts increased to 10. All previous Sigma / Quantaray lenses for Nikon cameras came with no built-in focus motor.
  7. These lenses were also branded Quantaray. Finding out which version of the Sigma 70 (75) -300 is hiding under the name 'Quantaray' can be more difficult than with the original Sigma lenses.

In the general case, four main classes can be distinguished (depending on the optical design):

  1. Optical design 14/11, used in the first versions. APO subversion used 2 SLD elements. Conventional subversions used 1 SLD element. It is easy to distinguish by the very 'chubby' switch 'NORMAL MACRO 300' (only 300).
  2. Optical design 14/10, used in a huge variety of subversions. APO subversion used 3 SLD elements. Conventional subversions used 1 SLD element. Easy to distinguish by the small / conventional 'NORMAL MACRO (200-300)' switch (in the range of 200-300). Curious that the lens Olympus Zuiko Digital ED 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 ED Replicates the Sigma 14/10 optical circuit with 3 SLD elements.
  3. Optical design 16/11, used only in the latest version with image stabilizer.
  4. Lenses with a 14/11 optical design are easily recognizable by the focal length range of 75-300 mm.

List of major versions:

  1. APO Macro 14/11 (2 SLDs)
  2. DL 14/11 (1 SLD)
  3. DL Macro 14/11 (1 SLD)
  4. DL Macro Super 14/10 (1 SLD)
  5. APO Macro Super 14/10 (3 SLD)
  6. DL Macro Super II 14/10 (1 SLD)
  7. APO Macro Super II 14/10 (3 SLD)
  8. DG Macro 14/10 (1 SLD) (for Nikon, there are 2 options depending on the focus motor and aperture ring)
  9. DG APO Macro 14/10 (3 SLD) (for Nikon, there are 2 options depending on the focus motor and aperture ring)
  10. DG OS 16/11 (1 SLD)
  11. 14/11 with a focal length of 75-300

The information I provided may not be accurate or incomplete, please, experienced users, please indicate inaccuracies in the comments.

All my reviews of such lenses (marking according to the inscriptions on the case):

  1. Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 (for Canon, Macro 200-300)
  2. Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D D.L. Macro (for Nikon, Macro AT 300)
  3. Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D DL MACRO SUPER (for Nikon, Macro 200-300)
  4. Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 Apo dg (for Nikon, Macro 200-300)
  5. Sigma 70-300mm 1:4-5.6 DG OS (for Canon)
  6. Quantaray 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D LDO Macro (for Nikon, Macro AT 300)
  7. Quantaray 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 D LDO Macro (for Nikon, Macro 200-300)
  1. Sigma Zoom AF-APO 1:4.5-5.6 f =75-300mm multi-coated Macro (for Nikon)
  2. Quantaray TECH-10 NF AF MULTI-COATED 1: 4-5.6 f =75-300mm (for Nikon)

A catalog of modern Sigma telephoto lenses is available see here.

Sample Photos

Pictures from Nikon D90. The photos in the gallery below are shown without processing, the conversion of the source RAW files by the original Nikon ViewNX-i utility without making additional adjustments.

'JPEG' source photos from the camera Nikon D90 can скачать здесь. Part of the photo helped me prepare Anna Ishtar nTr.

All Original Similar Nikon FX Telephoto Lenses

Below is a list of all Nikon Nikkor telephoto lenses without high aperture and with auto focus support:

  1. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1: 4, 1986-1987
  2. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1:4-5.6, 1987-1993
  3. Nikon AF Nikkor 75-300mm 1:4.5-5.6, 1989-1998
  4. Nikon AF Nikkor 80-200mm 1:4.5-5.6D, 1991-1999
  5. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-210mm 1:4-5.6D, 1993-2000
  6. Nikon AF Micro Nikkor 70-180mm 1: 4.5-5.6D ED, 1997-2005
  7. Nikon AF Nikkor 75-240mm 1:4.5-5.6D, 1999-2000
  8. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6D ED, 1998-2006
  9. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6D, 1998-2006 (?)
  10. Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4-5.6G, from 2000 to 2014, black or silver
  11. Nikon AF S Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6G ED VR IF SWM, from 2006 to 2017
  12. Nikon AF S Nikkor 70-200mm 1: 4G ED SWM VR IF N Nano Crystal Coat, from 2012 to the present day
  13. Nikon AF-P Nikkor 70-300mm 1:4.5-5.6E VR ED, 2017 to present

The names of the lenses are indicated according to their spelling on the case.

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG

Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 APO DG is not new for sale. For use, it is preferable to look at the newer model Sigma APO DG 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 (golden inscription Sigma APO DG).

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram

Add a comment:



Comments: 59, on the topic: Sigma 70-300mm D 1 review: 4-5.6 APO DG

  • Ilyas

    dark glass, but not bad

  • Dmitriy

    Damn, look at the prices for more or less light glasses of the 70-200 or 70-300 range, under Nikon bayonet and it becomes sad. Even Avito's prices are unpleasant. For Canon - please 70-200 / 4 worth humane money. There are even 70-200 / 2.8 with a tolerable price tag. From Nikkor only the ancient 70-210 / 4 is tolerant. Which turned exactly 30 this year! Years old. More and more often, thoughts are coming to sell D3s and take 1DsMk3. Simply because the choice of glasses is more interesting and good offers come across. I don’t earn money from photography and I don’t suffer from religious intolerance to brands.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Nikon has 80-200 MK2 for a penny, an excellent glass, optically no worse than MK3. For the poorest, there is 80-200 / 2,8 MK1, to the drawing of which the Kenon L-Kam 70-00 / 4 as before the sky. Everything is very relative.

      • Vladislav

        One thing is bad with manual lenses; people with poor eyesight are more likely to miss focusing than the camera's automation.

        • Sergei

          Shoot on Sony, there is contour illumination for accurate focusing and the depth of field is visible. Maybe not on all models, I don’t know, but on the A99, A77, A58, which I used, it definitely is. Yes, by the way, about the discussed Sigma (I have the latest model), it is cheap without a stub, and on a dormouse it will be compensated by a carcass with its “dynamic” matrix. Anticipating accusations of “soniphanism” I will say that I have a Nikon D7100 and get along well with two models, and there is something to compare with.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          And here are manual lenses? 80-200 / 2.8 from MK1 to MK8 are all autofocus.

      • Kirill Yankovsky

        I agree completely! How can you compare the Nikkor 80-200 with the Canon 70-200 F4. The pop elk as such has no “pattern” - a dull, sterile - reportage picture with a neutral bokeh on f4 and with ugly octagons on the covered ones. I have in my collection a flawless 8-80 MKIII. 200-70 F200 also had a couple of months, used on Sony. In addition, almost all of these Elks have a marriage - either a skewed depth of field, or decentralization. Even on Flickr, every second frame from 4-70 has either soap on the sides, then double vision in one corner or soap where a normal lens clearly falls into the depth of field

  • Michael

    Nice lens, more interesting, more contrast than DL Super


    I allow myself to disagree about the figure of Nikon 80-200 to the sky compared to Kenon 70-200 / 4. I looked in your reviews, Arkady, and in my opinion nikon twists bokeh more like helios compared to kenon 70-200 / 4. It would be fair to compare with photographs taken by kenon also for the authorship of Arkady. But there is no such lens in the reviews.

    • Alexey

      Yes, Nikon 80-200 twists bokeh, but is much weaker than Helios, and this is only a plus in photographs with a central composition.

      • Fedor

        Is bokeh twisting cool or vice versa? I understand that it is tasteful, but the professionals probably have some preferences in terms of bokeh in portraits. What are they? What is "perfect bokeh", maybe someone will throw a link to a specific example? I'm not joking, I'm really interested.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          This is all taste and there is no single answer. Different bokeh features of different lenses can be useful for different scenes. Someone likes the blur in the trash, someone loves cream, someone bubbles, someone from old-school photographers thinks fixation on bokeh is evil, etc. A lot of amateur photographers (seriously!) Will not distinguish a face portrait for this Sigma 300 / 5,6 and some 135 / 2,0.

        • Nicodemus

          "Perfect bokeh" - Utopia. Different in like is wonderful.

        • Alexey

          So it seems already answered coolly or not. With the central location of the main element, the twist creates an aura that directs attention to this element, plus an illusion of movement is created, the plot looks more dynamic. But the ideal bokeh does not exist, and the plots in the photo are different, and the people who view them.

        • kotofei

          Twisted bokeh is an image DEFECT. An artifact, the consequences of an attempt to compensate for other optical distortions and obtain a higher aperture ratio using simplified optical schemes. In helios, this is due to powerlessness and inability to produce high-quality glass in a scoop. In the aforementioned nikon, the consequences are to tighten the aperture ratio to a constant 2,8 and not get out of the budget (yes, the budget is determined by the manufacturability of production!).
          In general, this is a marriage. In commercial photography, it is NOT possible to offer this to the customer.

  • Dmitriy

    The velvet coating is, of course, still disgusting ... But you can immediately see whether you used the lens a lot or a little - it is only peeled off.

    • Andrey Vyunenko

      I bought on Avito such a sigma with an uncoated coating, just not APO, but just DG, so I didn’t use it (-: just didn’t understand, when switching to macro mode, at what distance does it start to focus? My slider moves very tightly and very slightly a little, maybe not until the end?

      • Arkady Shapoval

        In macro mode, it focuses from MDF 0.95 m to infinity. The slider can only be turned on in the 200-300 mm position. When you exit the macro mode, the focusing distance must be greater than 1.5 meters (there is an indicator on the distance scale), otherwise you will break the slider.

        • Andrey Vyunenko

          Thank you so much for the necessary information! I myself would certainly not have thought of it.

        • Andrey Vyunenko

          My shots are on this lens. And now I'm waiting with Avito sigma 70-300mm with a stabilizer in the version for Canon.

          • Arkady Shapoval

            Thank you

  • Nikita

    I choose between such a sigma (Only with a motor) and Tamron 70-300 DI LD Macro. I will shoot mainly aircraft (spotting). Tamron is cheaper, but sharpness seems to be better for Sigma, and less for Sigma. But are the differences so significant? It may be generally take Nikkor 55-200 with a stub, but I think 300mm for spotting will be better) The budget is unfortunately limited.
    Thanks in advance

    • Valery A.

      I would advise you to choose a telephoto camera with VR, otherwise shooting handheld, without a tripod, will be very difficult - you will not have enough fast shutter speed. And with VR, the hole can be covered up to f / 10, the shutter speed will be at least 1/100, and the frames are sharp. I myself have 55-200VR. Ascending further follow, IMHO, 55-300, 70-300 AF-P DX, tamron 70-300VR, H.70-300VR. And the picture can be cropped and pinned:

      • Valery A.

        Sorry, I can’t load the crop, they are restored to full. This one too?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      I would take this Sigma, although the Tamron A14 is not bad. The lack of a stub is not as scary as they write about it. Here in the gallery there are photos with ISO and shutter speed, on a sunny day at ISO 200 and F / 5.6 shutter speed between 1/1000 and 1/2000 seconds, if you cover the aperture to F / 8, then 1/800 second is quite enough for handheld shooting . Well, and no one forbids shooting at ISO 400, where even old cameras give an acceptable result, then there are no problems due to the lack of stub on a sunny day.

      • Levon

        Arkady, and this sigma has a macro ratio of what? Tamron A17 1: 2
        Thank you, your reviews are the best I've seen about photography)

    • Nikita

      Thanks for the help)

  • Ishtar nTr

    The lens has an awfully tight zoom that distorts the entire camera when you twist it.

    • Andrey Vyunenko

      There is such (-: far from for ladies' fingers ...

  • Andrei

    There was such an apparatus, rather sharp, but the construct was annoying with the trunk going out and the macro turned on with further jamming in this position.

    • Oleg

      There is such (jamming of the macro power button). You have to switch to manual focus on the camera in order to “lower” the lens focusing ring, then the macro switch is unlocked. Another funny thing is that if the lens hood is set to the other side at this moment, the focusing ring is inaccessible, and if you twist it behind the hood, it often falls off. This is a little annoying. Well, when I first encountered this, I quickly realized what to do, otherwise I would have shot in macro mode (but the lens becomes long, wow, especially if I still screw in the hood) until I got to the Internet.
      In general, the lens is not bad, the possibility of a 1: 2 macro adds attractiveness, almost always on the camera in the summer, but I almost never use it from late autumn to spring, since there is not much light part of the day, and when it is short, it’s also foggy, because to shoot on a dark telephoto, but with a missing stub, it’s not at all interesting. Is that some kind of specific subjects from a tripod.

  • Ivan

    Please tell me, autofocus does not work in this lens (version with a built-in motor without a screwdriver) and Nikon D5500. I bought a used lens and when checking the camera did not switch the mode of mf and af when switching to the lens, maybe this says something. And the main problem is that at any focal length from 70 to 300 he does not move the focus at all, and silence. BUT there is one caveat when we put the whale lens and then again the sigma before this, having slightly sighed the contacts of the sim, it began to focus (!) And everything is fine. Then I don’t remember turning off the camera or did something and autofocus does not work again. It works perfectly on the native lens; according to the seller, the sigma itself worked without problems on d7 * 00. On the subject of 10 contacts, on the device 8. The device is newest because I think the iron is in order and the contacts. The lens looks almost like new. In manual mode, focus confirmation (green dot) works.
    I'm still not an expert in photo questions, maybe something is just in the settings or what's the problem?

    • Dmitro

      Good day! I have this lens with a motor on the old D40x works fine, also used / took, everything is in order.
      Special thanks to the author for the review, he helped me make a choice.

      • Valery A.

        Probably, this is the problem, that q40X is old, but 5500 is not - a knight's move from Nikon. They say that rollback to old firmware helps.

  • Eugene

    I will sell Sigma AF 70-300 f / 4-5.6 APO Nikon
    Price 2600 UAH
    Complete with hood
    Tel: 0975310941

  • anonym

    Great glass. I like it. Cheap and cheerful.

  • Alexey

    I have been using this lens for several years. I bought it brand new in Canada. For Nikon, it seemed to me a very good option. However, after several years, and having gained experience, now I certainly would not have bought such a lens. The first is that the lens is quite dark. Secondly, the macro is not real but pseudo. Thirdly, the zoom is very free. In fact, if you turn the camera down with the lens, it will automatically change the focal length. That would be somewhere to find how to lubricate this thing with some viscous grease.
    Now I am sure that it is better to take a specific normal glass for specific purposes (according to your budget) than chasing some kind of universal lenses. Anyway, I ended up using a Tamron 90mm F2,8 under a screwdriver for macro photography. This is glass, so is glass. My TV set from nikkor 135mm f2 is small. All of these lenses beat sigma in every way. I believe that this lens is worth taking for people who are not going to delve into the field of photography. And just like that, to play around - it will go. But if you plan on taking photography more seriously, then don't waste your money. Better to gradually buy highly specialized lenses. And I would advise you to take permanent non-life zoom lenses.

    • B. R. P.

      Well compared! Good fixes with inexpensive zoom. What macro can be on the zoom? But zooms are different, and in serious classes, photos can be very useful.

    • Novel

      Too categorical. Dark means compact and lightweight. Zoom means a convenient set of focal lengths. Sometimes this is important. For travel-shooting, for example, when you can't run with your feet with fixes or changing them is not very convenient.

      90mm for macro photography is yes, but this is target macro photography (well, a little portrait - moderate tele). The same lens can solve several more problems.

      A drooping trunk is a disease of many zooms. And even eminent Canon ones. It is now being treated with a separate latch that prevents spontaneous deployment in the stowed position.

      So I agree that certain tasks are best solved with certain tools, but the universal compact, darkish zoom is only one of them. It’s also not so expensive that you can make a decision about its necessity for so long.

  • Denis

    A very good lens, especially considering the cost. It was APO DG Macro (with a red stripe) that I used on my own camera. The impressions from use and the result itself (photos) are more positive than when I used the AF-S Nikkor 70-300 ED VR, except that there is no stabilizer.

    • Denis

      here is such a lens:

      makes such pictures:



      currently ready to find a new owner along with the camera and other lenses

  • Antonio

    Hello. Help out - I choose between this and Nikon ED AF Nikkor 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6D
    That suggest?

  • Valery

    I choose between Nikon 70-210 4-5.6D and Sigma 70-300 APO DG, which advise?

  • Vadiuhin

    Tell me, pliz, what actually happens when switching to macro, mdf changes, or what?

    • Vadiuhin

      It seems that he got to the bottom of it - 1,5 meters turns into 0,95 for 200-300 focal lengths ...

      • B. R. P.

        Well, yes, on a similar Tamron the same story.

      • Vadiuhin

        The second day I own this glass, and have already matured to give advice))))
        So, if the glass during storage is not removed from the carcass, then it is advisable to transfer the carcass to manual focusing so as not to disrupt the focusing mechanism of the lens. When the device is turned on, the first thing the hand reaches out for is to remove the hood, installed the other way around ... and there is a trunk that rotates when focusing ...

        • Trueash

          Oops ... Thanks for the tip, I'll take into account.

  • Vladislav

    And I have been the owner of such a handsome man for two years. My camera is 550 Boots. In parallel, Elki (100, 24-105) fall into my hands, I also own Vega-12V, Helios 44/2, Zeiss Jena DDR 80, Industar 61 and something else. Of course, there is a whale.))) It turns out that when you get tired of the artistry of all this goodness and want quality - your hands reach for Sigma. The second most frequently used is Vega 12V. Zeiss always really wants to put on, and then, for some reason, I also really want to take it off. An interesting fact: if you focus the projection from the lens on a white sheet, then the colors are much richer in Zeiss. The rest have faded colors. After talking with very experienced photographers, I found out that it was very noticeable on film, but there was no difference for the figure. Such is the experiment.
    Sigma. Sigma is a wonderful modern lens, which is not inferior in quality to elks as follows from my experience of use and my feelings. Keith and Sigma, in principle, completely cover the needs in the entire focal range. But in the work There is, of course, a fly in the ointment: MDF. 1,5m. in normal mode and 0,9 in macro mode. You can get used to it and you can work quite well. But not very convenient. It is for this reason that the second number is Vega 12V: MDF is much more convenient. It is for the same reason that I rarely use the optically problem-free Zeiss - MDF. I shoot mostly in the studio and mostly still lifes.
    Perhaps I own this lens for the reason that in owl time I didn’t take the trouble to find a more suitable option in terms of usability for studio photography, but would I take this lens a second time if I had to choose? Yes. Great glass! And, since there is something in me from the "glazier-hoarder", I am calm! There is always a pile of glass to match the occasion!
    “Now go away! This is my well! ” (from) )))

  • Trueash

    I will also unsubscribe, perhaps, although the experience of shooting with this lens is already a whole day :) But nevertheless ...
    For some reason, I am biased towards Sigma, I always bypassed them, and then I got this lens (the most newest, with gold letters) - not that free, but, say, by barter. In general, twisting your nose would be silly.
    And you know? I was pleasantly surprised. Below are my impressions (not a review in any way)

    What I liked:
    - A sharp picture up to about 220 mm, then the sharpness gradually subsides, but not so much so ... 300 mm is quite working. Yes, I specifically shot it in the open to check this particular parameter.
    - At the long end, the diaphragm decreases, and you need to put the stream back; that is, when you go from 300 mm to, say, 80, the diaphragm remains 5,6. Although, maybe I demand a lot?
    - Nice blur / separation of the subject from the background.
    - Focuses quite quickly.
    - The zoom ring rotates easily, but tightly, nothing backlash, does not rattle, the trunk does not go out.

    What (slightly) disliked:
    - At 200-300 the camera sometimes refuses to focus, for half a second or a second literally. As I understand it, this occurs when you aim at some low-contrast object.
    - When focusing, the entire muzzle rotates, along with the hood. This is somewhat uncomfortable for me, because I am used to only slightly supporting the lens with my fingers.
    - As I said, slightly soft on the long end ... but as I understand it, in this price category they are all like that.
    - It looks like the color really leaves a little in warm tones.

    And one more conclusion: reviews are undoubtedly a useful thing (especially here, on Radozhiv), but until you try it yourself, you won't know what is good for you and what is not. I had a Nikon 4.5-5.6 / 70-300 VR - everyone praises and recommends it, but somehow it didn't work out for me. But this Sigma came right in.

    The attached image is slightly processed: the BB is exposed in the eyes, the shadows on the face are slightly softened, cold tones in the shadows are added

    • Oleg

      Focus is fast when focus is not shifted too much. If the focus was at infinity, and you need to shoot a close object, or vice versa, the slowness is felt well. When shooting action scenes, it is very noticeable. But since this is not a pro lens, you cannot put it in the minuses, you just need to understand this in work.

      • Trueash

        Actually, that's exactly what I'm talking about: as a non-professional lens, this Sigma is very good. I didn't find any flaws in the “deal breaker” category.
        As for focusing, I meant a little different. Specifically: filming dancers on stage. The stage is brightly lit by the sun, the distance is 20 meters. Filmed in more or less static moments - when the dancer stopped or held any pose. That is, the distances did not change much. So, the shutter release sometimes did not work, because the lens either did not have time to focus, or did not see what to catch. But not for long - it was enough to move the point from the eyes to, say, the edge of the scarf, and then back, and the camera came to life. Well, not to say that it happens all the time.

  • Atanas

    Hello, Arkady. I have such a question - I found this lens at a decent price. But I can't figure out if it will work on Nikon D3500. On dpreview, they write that it focuses thanks to an internal motor. And Vyi write that he has no motor. I want to change my Soligor-a 250mm for something longer and with auto focus ...
    thanks in advance

    • Victor

      There are two versions of this lens, the one with a motor - without the D index, probably on dpreview it is.

      But with the d3500 it would be nice to check the autofocus operation even on the motor version - not all new Nikon cameras and not all firmware work with Sigma.

  • Alexander

    Sigma AF 70-300mm F4.0-5.6 APO MACRO DG with Nikon D3300 no af

  • Anton

    Tell me what will be better for Nikon D5200, for shooting nature and sports (mostly indoors)
    Sigma 70-300 (I understand that there will be no autofocus)
    Nikon 55-200mm
    About the same price.

    • B. R. P.

      Sports without af - there will be a lot of marriage (except for chess / checkers). Yes, even indoors on a dark zoom. Nature is still back and forth (not all). Take better with af.

  • Alexey

    Sigma 70-300mm f/4.0-5.6 AF APO Macro DG for crop or full frame?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      for full frame

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Version en español de este artículo