answers: 93

  1. Ilyas
    04.06.2017

    Arkady, some superzoom)

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      04.06.2017

      Where? This poor Sigma, like other similar lenses, barely survives zoom with a magnification of 4X :)

      Reply

  2. Victor
    04.06.2017

    I had a version of such a lens for Nikon. In the focal range 200-300, we got a good mess on the Nikon D40 and D5100.

    Reply

  3. ULADZIMIR
    04.06.2017

    Sigma has a tendency to produce only expensive and high-quality ones. The Art series is a confirmation of this. Photo enthusiasts suffer because of this. In addition to this glass, they also removed from production 50-150 / 2,8. Offering in return after a couple of years 50-100 / 1,8. And these are other focal ones, undoubtedly higher quality of the picture, but also the price is high.

    Reply

  4. ASP
    05.06.2017

    There is speculation about “why the Sigma DG OS 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 was discontinued and why there is still no replacement for the lens”.
    Sigma and Tamron appeared with 18-300 and 16-300 ultrasounds, respectively, which fully satisfy the needs of amateur photographers in the entire range of focal lengths, and also have a stabilizer in versions for Kenon and Nikon, i.e. it turns out that it is easier to wear one universal lens than at least two (for example, 18-55 and 70-300), all the more so since the 300mm picture for 70-300 ultrasounds and televisions is quite comparable.
    I found this idea in the Tamron 16-300 / 3.5-5.6 PZD review (http://www.alphatraveller.org/archives/412).
    Also at the end of winter, Sigma announced and released for sale in May a new television set for amateur photographers SIGMA 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary, which, judging by the reviews, was completely successful. So it makes no sense to produce cheaper 70-300, because they will not be bought, and whoever needs to buy the BU as cheaply as possible.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      05.06.2017

      The idea is not entirely consistent.

      18-300 и 16-300 - lenses for crop.
      70-300 DG OS - full format lens, analog Canon 70-300IS, Nikon 70-300VR, Tamron 70-300VC (the latter is relatively new).

      SIGMA 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary with a price tag of $ 800 and a weight of 1.2 kg is no substitute for the relatively light and cheap Sigma 70-300 DG OS.

      Reply

      • ASP
        05.06.2017

        I did not mention that I talked about cropped cameras (for them, as I wrote, it seems there is no sense in buying 70-300 if there are 16 (18) -300).
        Most amateur photographers have cropped cameras, and 70-300 lenses were bought to get more than 200mm focal length (inexpensive, a good picture in the center of a full-frame lens on the crop and most importantly, telephoto cameras are almost never made for crop (for example, Nikon 55-300mm f / 4.5 -5.6G ED DX VR AF-S Nikkor, Nikon 70-300mm f / 4.5-6.3G ED AF-P DX, Nikon 70-300mm f / 4.5-6.3G ED VR AF-P DX, Sony DT 55-300mm f /4.5-5.6)(I don’t know about the 300 mm picture of these Nikon lenses, but for Sony the picture was not very good at 300 mm)).
        SIGMA 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary I think there is a replacement for full-frame lenses 70-300, because full-frame cameras are still expensive, the camera market is shrinking and making cheap telephoto lenses is not at all profitable, especially those that are present in a huge number of control units.
        And yes, the weight of the SIGMA 100-400mm F5-6.3 DG OS HSM Contemporary is large (according to my observations, all Sigma have a large weight, for example, similar Tamrons always weigh less and have a smaller filter diameter), and the price will drop, albeit not immediately (so happens with all Sigma lenses).

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        05.06.2017

        I'm not sure the companies are counting on some of their products to buy used products. - it is simply not profitable for them, and in the west they are referred to as second-hand ones. photographic equipment is not like ours.

        Reply

      • ASP
        05.06.2017

        I did not say that the company is profitable from selling used lenses, I considered the situation from the point of view of a amateur photographer in this situation (you will need a specific lens that is no longer available, you can buy a used lens).
        Companies are just not interested in buying their products; therefore, they stop producing old lenses and do not directly replace them, because the market is saturated, and they offer something else (trying to do better), thereby breaking the established model for buying lenses, forcing the user to buy a new one.
        Now the market for photographic equipment is not growing (according to financial reports and market analysts) and updating the usual models is not profitable, because the market is full of well-functioning used lenses (lenses, unlike cameras, have been used for decades).

        For example, Minolta produced a good amateur series of lenses: 24-50 / 4, 35-70 / 4, 70-210 / 4 and 28-135 / 4-4.5 (such an intermediate link, not very dark lenses and not bright, but with good picture), which Sonya did not update after Minolta's purchase. there were a lot of them on the market and new such lenses would not be sold corny (unlike “professional” lenses, which were not touched by re-release (or simply modernized) and very simple ones, which were still cheaper at release).

        And another fresh example, autofocus lenses with a focal length of 135mm can be counted on one hand and most were released 10 or more years ago (2006 - Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T * 135mm f / 1.8 ZA (SAL-135F18Z), 1996 - Canon EF 135mm f / 2L USM) and have just started producing 135mm lenses (Zeiss Batis APO Sonnar FE 135 mm f / 2.8 T *, Sigma AF 135mm f / 1.8 DG HSM Art, something that Sony herself is preparing), i.e. For 20 years, manufacturers have seen no reason to produce 135mm autofocus lenses. a gigantic number of lenses with a focal length of 135mm were produced (among which there were excellent pictures and eternal construction, and taking into account the focus on professionals, it turned out that autofocus is not always necessary for them, for example, a portrait in a studio).

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        05.06.2017

        The topic with 135 threads is ambiguous, it is believed that versions 135 2.8 were not released due to the zooms of 70 (80) -200 (210) /2.8 (discussed here).
        The problem of amateur photographers, especially beginners, is that they do not know anything about old technology and only choose what is in the windows of modern online stores. So who knew that, for example, there are a million versions of these Sigma 70-300 and that the simplest can be taken for a penny? And you can take another 2 times cheaper than Quantaray, about which no one heard anything at all (I exaggerate, of course).
        In this case, as a counter-example, look at Canon, which is ahead of the rest, releasing a dark L-ku Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 LIS USM and recently upgraded IS to IS II with NanoUSM - Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 ISII USM

        Reply

      • ASP
        05.06.2017

        Yes, the appearance of 70-200 / 2.8 zooms certainly crippled the sales of 135 / 2.8 lenses (photographers were able to not wear a bunch of fast lenses, which was replaced by one not much easier), but for example Minolta released the consumer autofocus Minolta AF 135mm F / 2.8 and it is quite it is still suitable for use and most importantly it was cheaper than three times and costs more than 70-200 / 2.8 much BU.
        I agree with your conclusion in the article, as Of course, lens makers wanted to make money selling expensive 70-200 / 2.8 zooms, which were probably touted as a panacea and universal salvation.

        By the way, which confirms that manufacturers after saturating the market with one single model (type) of lenses decide that everything needs to be changed and they stop production of familiar models (135 / 2.8, 70-300, 28-300, etc.) offering what’s new in return (more focal or range shifting, but expensive since new).

        Sigma has always been stigmatized with the low quality of lenses (in my opinion, it is more correct to blame it for poor quality control of its products, since it was necessary to choose a good copy) and therefore I think it has practically stopped producing cheap lenses and is trying to offer an exclusive in order to somehow get rid of past "notoriety".

        Canon from its about half of the market probably does not yet consider it necessary to change something (sales are going on, you just need to produce something “the same, but with mother-of-pearl buttons”: a new autofocus motor, LCD screen, a pair of new lenses in the optical scheme, etc., a little more expensive).
        As an example of the lack of any interest in changing something, Canon was the last to release a mirrorless “for show” and only this year a new mirrorless model is starting to be interesting to buy.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        05.06.2017

        Canon Zoom Lens EF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 L IS- well, originally, the dark zoom of the L-series. A scoundrel, not a canon

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        05.06.2017

        This is all relative. Nikon has a dark Nikon ED AF VR-Nikkor 80-400mm 1:4.5-5.6D professional series (with a gold ring) and nothing, everyone reconciled.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        05.06.2017

        But still 400 is better than 300 for photo hunting, for example

        Reply

  5. AND
    05.06.2017

    For me, it makes no sense. There are native analogues for almost the same money, devoid of the main weakness of sigma - mediocre AF. A long time ago, when I just bought a 20d, the question arose about choosing a telephoto, at a price the difference between a used 70-200 / 4 without a stub and 70-300 with a stub was minimal. I took 70-200, which I never regretted. I was especially pleased with the fast and tenacious AF, and the working open throughout the entire focal range. The only real minus of the glass is the light gray color of the frame, which attracts unnecessary attention.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      05.06.2017

      As for the Sigma data, for Canon they use a micro-focus motor, with which the logic of the focusing system is different from that of the USM. To summarize, it is with the 70-300 that Sigma has no particular problems. Well, 200 is not 300, and without a stub and with a stub - the lenses are very different.

      As for the Sigma 70-300 for Nikon, it is still easier there, the vast majority of models do not have a built-in focusing motor and focus using the camera motor. The logic of the focusing system with such lenses is very different from lenses with a built-in motor. Usually, such lenses focus, albeit slowly, but very tenaciously and much less often have problems with autofocus. In general, the tenacity of non-motorized Sigma lenses is much better than that of modern HSM ART lenses from Sigma. You won't believe it until you check it.

      Reply

      • AND
        05.06.2017

        According to AF s on sigma, maybe it's not that bad. I had experience with sigma 28 / 1.8 ex dg, with a normal, not hsm AF - I was very disappointed in terms of AF, the most offensive thing is that he blatantly lied in difficult / mixed / artificial light - the indicator was on in the video recorder, but on in fact not, and had to constantly check. At the same time, in daylight everything was fine. Of course, in a telephoto view, especially in a dark one, the behavior in artificial and difficult lighting is not so critical, but still, the sediment remained. Well, the fact that 70-200 and 70-300 are different lenses is indisputable. All the same, for an amateur, the question of price is far from the last, and not everyone can afford to have a reportage zoom of 70-200, and a supertele of the 100-400 class. Then it seemed to me more needed 200/4 than 300 / 5.6, albeit with a stub.

        Reply

      • cybernetics
        20.09.2020

        > Generally speaking, it is with the 70-300 that Sigma has no particular problems
        Yes, it looks like there are serious serial problems for the whole family - it cuts off the plastic teeth on the focusing barrel at least in screwdriver models, but there are cases with motor models.
        At the same time, there are no spare parts on free sale.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        21.09.2020

        And we are not talking about breakdowns here, but about problems with focusing, accuracy, and so on.

        Reply

  6. Oleg
    17.06.2017

    I have a version with a gold inscription Sigma APO DG, aperture ring and without a focus motor. Checked on motorless Nikonov, focusing does not work, on motor Nikonov works.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      17.06.2017

      Please take a look at the view of your lens and attach it to the comment here.

      Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        In another topic recently cited a photo of the lens.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        17.06.2017

        There is no aperture control ring visible, only golden lettering. Please take another picture. This will complement my “history” section, because I have never seen gold SIGMA APO DGs and no motor / diaphragm ring before.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        Here is so clearer

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        17.06.2017

        Thank you.

        Reply

  7. Oleg
    17.06.2017

    The lens is pretty good (I'm specifically talking about the version of APO DG, if they somehow differ in quality). If you shoot on film, then all the nuances play a big role, and in the era of digital editors, sharpness, contrast, color, etc. You can always fix it. For business photos, this may not be suitable, and if for a private collection to shoot, for social networks, then more than acceptable. In macro mode, it shoots very well. Second-hand non-rotary version costs 1500-1800 hryvnias (60-70 dollars). If the budget is limited, a very good purchase. There will be free funds, I’ll buy from the first versions of my native TV set 2,8, and at the moment I don’t see the point of taking from the stash or saving up. If you earn money in a photo, then it’s another matter, it makes sense to invest in better and more expensive equipment and beat off your investments with your work, and if you shoot for yourself, you can navigate by your pocket. If you can easily buy a lens for a hundred thousand hryvnias, why not buy, of course it’s better to buy, and if there are only a couple of thousand free, then such a sigma is a good option for television lovers.

    Reply

    • Oleg
      17.06.2017

      Aftofocus yes, it is rather weak at large focal lengths, if you need to switch from a near object to a distant one or vice versa, it takes a lot of time, and at 70 mm it is quite normal. Well, this is so, according to personal impressions, without the ability to compare with other televisions.

      Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        without treatment

        Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        photography, small processing and cropping

        Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        sunset, shooting against the sun, without filters, small processing

        Reply

      • Oleg
        17.06.2017

        well, the landscape

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        18.06.2017

        Would you post pictures in review of the most similar version, but not in this, where is the version with a stabilizer and other optics.

        Reply

  8. Dmitriy
    21.11.2017

    Please advise which lens to take for the D7100 - sigma 70-300 DG OS or nikon 55-300 VR? Optically which is better? All focal lengths are closed, so 55 or 70mm doesn't really matter. Sigma for full frame optics and optically should be better but is it?

    Reply

  9. Antip
    29.11.2017

    I purchased this lens today in a commission for $ 70. All test photos were taken by Nikon D90 at the time of purchase. 1. Car number 5,6 / 15 is200 f300mm 2. Drops on the car 5,6 / 30 iso200 f300mm 3. Flashlight 5,6 / 90 iso1600 f300mm - approximately 150m. Camera setup 6 + 1 + 1
    WB-A JPEG-L

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      29.11.2017

      You can add 1 photo to 1 comment, size in pixels - any, size - up to 1 mb.

      Reply

  10. Antip
    30.11.2017

    Another photo. 5,6 / 180 iso500 f300mm. It is quite a normal lens for an amateur. If
    I want to sell better and buy another is not a problem.

    Reply

  11. Anastasia
    01.02.2018

    Is it possible to focus on this review for a similar lens under Nikon?
    Native Nikkorovskie I don’t pull the money, but I can buy this one for my D5100.
    Will it work for this camera?

    Reply

    • Valentine
      01.02.2018

      Whether it works or not depends on the frequency of use of this lens and the requirements for it. Some people shoot at 70-300 a couple of times in several years and then sell this lens at all, but there are those who constantly keep it on the camera. The used price can be very affordable. Native glasses are also found in a used version at lifting prices. Be sure to take the version with a stabilizer, for such focal points on the crop, this is important.

      Reply

      • Anastasia
        01.02.2018

        Thanks for answering!
        It’s written on the store’s website.
        Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 DG OS for Nikon
        Type: Nikon AF-S
        If I understand correctly, this is the version with the stabilizer.
        And still used, alas. But cheaper than similar native ones :(

        Reply

      • Valentine
        01.02.2018

        Find out exactly with or without stabilizer. Promote other ads and stores. Take your time with the purchase, then you can better understand what you need and what price is adequate. Televisions sell often, because they often make mistakes with the purchase (they do not understand exactly why it is needed and how often it will be filmed in fact - as a result, after dusting for a year on the shelf, it goes on sale).

        Reply

    • Oleg
      01.02.2018

      Okay, the main thing is to check that the model will have a built-in focusing motor, since there are versions for a camera screwdriver for Nikon Sigma 70-300. The lens is quite normal, and if somewhere there is not enough sharpness or contrast, you can always tighten it during processing. It behaves normally in the backlight, a good bonus is macro 1: 2.

      Reply

      • Anastasia
        01.02.2018

        Thanks for the answer. I'm just starting to figure it all out.
        It’s written on the store’s website.
        Sigma 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 DG OS for Nikon
        Type: Nikon AF-S.
        Wow, and the macro will also be! I'm playing with Helios 44-2M for macro)))

        Reply

      • Sergey
        01.02.2018

        For macro, Helios will be better. In any case, I prefer either him or Industar-61L / D.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        01.02.2018

        There are different situations, it is not always possible to put the lens point-blank to the subject. In some ways, one option is better, in something else.

        Reply

  12. Vladimir
    02.04.2018

    The other day I bought this telephoto camera, but for Nikon. I wanted some kind of portrait lens in the range of + - 100 mm for my Nikon d90. At first I was looking at the Nikon AF Nikkor 85mm F1.8D, but even in the secondary market, the price slightly “nibbled”. And so, Arkady (with his review and advice) threw up the idea to look at Sigma DG OS 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 under Nikon. And here are essentially my impressions of this lens:
    - the lens fully showed itself as in the review;
    - blurring of the background (bokeh) with a breast-facial portrait in the range of 200-300 mm is simply gorgeous (85-ka 1.8, as for me, will blur the background weaker);
    - I was pleased with the sharpness in the range from 70-200 mm, after 200 mm it is acceptable (I suspect that after 200 mm it is good, but I probably have little experience working with such a focal length;
    - the assembly is really solid for this class of lens (I had a tamron 70-300 without a stub, so the assembly is there, and the quality of the output picture is worse).

    From the nuances: the only thing is (it seemed to me very strange) a hood, which is sooooo tight to attach, and everything seems to be nothing, but it seems so tight that it seems that you can break under pressure (when you screw / unscrew the hood) the focusing motor, because when screwing / unscrewing the hood, spin the focusing ring, forcing the focusing motor to twist along with it, which already “cries” if it is turned mechanically (that is, by hand when the autofocus switch is turned on to AF, and the camera is turned off).

    Reply

    • Antip
      07.06.2018

      When unscrewing and twisting the lens hood, first set the lens to 300mm, now you can calmly, holding the elongated part, make significant efforts without
      fear of damaging the lens.

      Reply

    • Michal
      07.06.2018

      But all the same, he is not a replacement for his native 85mm. Cheaper - yes. But sometimes it is better to sell two cheap ones, add and take what you need.

      Reply

  13. Dmitriy
    24.07.2018

    I bought myself one in Zvenigorod for 6000 with a broken hood in December last year. 70 mm. with f5.6. as sharp as the Tamron 28-75 f2,8. Due to the stub even better on these focal. Compared with the Nikon 70-300mm f / 4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR including the D750. There is no difference. And the price is 7 times lower. Take it, I advise!

    Reply

  14. Alexander
    09.12.2018

    It is believed that the stabilization system is equivalent to Nikonovskaya, otherwise they would not have sued Sigma about this, after which this model was discontinued, and only the version without a stub remained.

    Reply

    • Antip
      06.10.2019

      The stabilizer in this model is DG OS, really excellent.

      Reply

  15. Victor
    10.06.2019

    Hello! Recently I bought a Sigma 70-300mm D 1: 4-5.6 DG lens for Nikon. For some reason, I did not find this in the list you provided ... (

    Reply

  16. Alexander
    23.08.2019

    such a question, will the Sigma DG 70-300 mm f4-5.6 lens for Nikon with a Nikon D200 camera work full-scale? thank you

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      23.08.2019

      work how?

      Reply

  17. Alexander
    04.03.2020

    Good day. Advise, is there any point in looking for this lens at flea markets? Or can I take the Tamron AF 70-300mm f / 4-5.6 Di LD MACRO 1: 2 (A17) or the Canon EF 70-300mm f / 4.0-5.6 IS USM?

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      04.03.2020

      Native I think better.

      Reply

  18. Denis
    13.03.2020

    Hello, please tell me DG OS will be better than APO DG? How important is the stabilizer?
    Thank you in advance!

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      14.03.2020

      Stabilizer is generally desirable on such focal lengths, but if the lighting conditions allow you to set a fairly short shutter speed, then you can do without it.

      Reply

      • Denis
        14.03.2020

        Thanks. I choose Avito between DG OS and APO DG, I just can’t understand what is better. Probably with a stub it will be better. I also considered a similar Tamron, but for some reason stopped at Sigma.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        14.03.2020

        Tamron is newer, if possible. then take it unambiguously with the stabilizer

        Reply

      • Denis
        14.03.2020

        Thank you very much for your help! Will Tamron be better? I read everything about them. As far as I understand, they are about the same. What would you take in my place?) Tamron AF70-300mm F / 4-5.6 Di LD Macro 1: 2 or Sigma DG OS 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6?
        Thank you in advance!

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        14.03.2020

        In general, Tamron will be better

        Reply

      • Michael
        14.03.2020

        Interesting opinion. Those. is sigma so bad that even a stabilizer doesn't make it preferable?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        14.03.2020

        A man is considering a similar Tamron with a stabilizer, version Tamron DI SP 70-300mm F / 4-5.6 VC USD A005. No one says Sigma is bad

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        14.03.2020

        I confess I did not recognize the Tamron model.
        In the case of the usual Tamron 70-300 macro and Sigma 70-300 OS, of course, Sigma will be preferable

        Reply

      • Denis
        14.03.2020

        Thank you for your opinion and discussion) In general, the situation has turned out so that today I took Sigma 70-300 DG. Without a stabilizer, but the condition is almost new (Only for 4500r). I am satisfied, although I encountered a number of minuses in the form of slow focusing and not the most clear picture. (But I was ready for this, and the price was appropriate). Without a stabilizer, it’s a little sad, but a short shutter speed and the ability to keep the camera level to help. The other day I’ll test and write more))

        Reply

  19. Vladimir
    20.05.2020

    My Sigma AF 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 DG OS, unlike those presented by you, has the line “OPTICAL STABILIZER” under the line “70-300mm 1 / 4-56”. The lens is excellent in its niche, much better than my previous Canon EF 70-300 IS.

    Reply

    • Vladimir
      20.05.2020

      4-5,6

      Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      20.05.2020

      Send (attach) a photo with a view of where and how it is written. To be sure. Thank.

      Reply

      • Rman
        14.06.2020

        Here is the version for Nikon

        Reply

  20. Oleg
    29.10.2020

    About a month ago, I took a used Sigma DG under the Sony A mount. The price is ridiculous 2000 rubles - $ 25.
    Yes, autofocus is braked, possibly due to a screwdriver, but you can twist the handles.

    200 mm chamber tube without treatment, Sony A37 /

    Reply

    • Novel
      29.10.2020

      25 bucks say ...

      Reply

      • Oleg
        01.11.2020

        Yes, approximately.

        Reply

    • cybernetics
      04.01.2021

      Judging by the mention of the screwdriver, you are talking about an older lens model without an optical stabilizer, so the price is the same.
      And DG OS for Sony cameras was produced with a built-in autofocus drive, unfortunately not very reliable.
      In the photo you have a focus miss, you hit a branch after a crow.

      Reply

  21. Denis
    21.01.2021

    Hello!

    I purchased the Sigma DG 70-300mm 1: 4-5.6 model for Nikon. Faced the following situation, on D700 the lens works in manual and auto focus modes. But on the D610 - only in manual focus mode. I switched all levers from “M” to “AF”, but the result is the same.
    + on D610 with this lens, “r14” is displayed on monochrome screen.

    A huge request to send or suggest what am I doing wrong? And how to deal with it)

    Thank you in advance for your reply!

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      21.01.2021

      r14 or f14? Most likely there is no normal contact with the microprocessor contacts

      Reply

      • Denis
        22.01.2021

        Just “r14”. I cleaned the contacts, checked everything - nothing. I shoot from 610 and put it on 700 - it works immediately.
        Other lenses are fine.

        Reply

    • Alexey
      21.01.2021

      Did you accidentally update the firmware on 610? Nikon is making changes to new firmware that blocks AF on Sigma optics. (r14 on the display, if my sclerosis does not lie to me, means how many frames can be taken in a series before the buffer is full, but I'm not a Nikonist, I can lie)

      Reply

      • Denis
        22.01.2021

        I updated the firmware just to solve this situation. But both the “old” and “new” firmware failed to fix the situation.
        It's so annoying and somehow there are no options left to solve the situation.

        Reply

      • Denis
        22.01.2021

        Now the 610 has firmware 1.04

        Reply

      • Jury
        22.01.2021

        read on the internet what number the very first firmware had, perhaps 1.01, if so, then you need to find it, fill it in and try with it.

        Reply

      • Denis
        23.01.2021

        Without waiting for an answer, yesterday I went to “play” with the firmware. First, 1.03 rolled on 1.04.

        And then step by step, testing each of the 4 firmware versions, checking all my lenses, I came to a decision!

        At 1.02, the error “r14” is displayed every other time, but the autofocus on Sigma seems to jam.
        At 1.01, the error is displayed, but autofocus works.

        As a result, in 2 evenings it was possible to identify and then solve the problem!

        P.S. but I'd rather wait for the answers here, and roll back the firmware with peace of mind)

        Thank you all for the help!

        Reply

      • Victor
        22.01.2021

        Roll back to the old firmware, 1.01 or 1.02. Nikon in new firmware muddies (officially), some changes to work with af-p, which breaks autofocus on all sigma.
        Perhaps this is just a competitive struggle, but who will admit it)))

        Reply

      • Denis
        23.01.2021

        So I did, I described everything a little higher.
        I would like to read your comment BEFORE yesterday's attempts, and not this morning))

        Thanks for the help!

        Reply

  22. Atanas
    17.04.2021

    Good day to everyone. I got a Sigma DG 70-300, at a good price ... Will automatic focusing work on Nikon D3500? I have not bought it yet, I am looking for a replacement to replace my Soligor-a 250mm MF

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      18.04.2021

      If with a motor, it should work. These modifications of the Sigma 70-300 are a wagon and a small bogie.

      Reply

      • Atanas
        18.04.2021

        Thank you.

        Reply

  23. Oleg
    22.07.2021

    Hello. There is a version with and without stabilizer. So the version with the stabilizer overestimates the ISO under equal shooting conditions, with the included or with the stub off. That is, the version without became, for example, 1000iso removes and with a stub 1600iso. Why?

    Reply

  24. Paul
    15.09.2021

    Good afternoon, I understand correctly that using the 5300-18 lenses and this Sigma DG OS 105-70 on the Nikon d300 crop, I will close the focal points in the 18-450mm range ??

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      15.09.2021

      Close the range 18-300 or in terms of ff-equivalent 27-450.

      Reply

    • Specialist
      15.09.2021

      And if you do not have (did not have) a full-frame camera, spit on the EGF so as not to get confused. Range 18-300 on your camera.

      Reply

      • Paul
        15.09.2021

        Thank you, you explained. I thought that a focal 300mm on an FF lens would behave like 450mm on a crop, but as I now understand the zoom factor is the same, and FF lenses simply have a wider angle of coverage of the panorama itself, so the subject seems to be more distant (with the same frames taken on the FF and Crop). I have a Nikon 55-300, it has good sharpness, a good stub and a 5,6 x 300 hole. I suppose that it doesn't make much sense to change it to this Sigma.

        Reply

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer