Reviews and Problems with Sigma APO 70-300mm F4-5.6 DG MACRO
Showing 1-10 of 24
Buy something else
D. Alexander, Amazon
12 July 2012
Summary: If you're on Canon, choose a 55-250 IS, 70-300 IS, or Tamron's 70-300 VC instead. The latter two are around $300 used; the former, $150. Given that the 55-250 is around $200 new, I see no reason ever to bother with this Sigma. When the only alternative was Canon's mediocre 75-300 series, it may have made sense. Not anymore. Here's why you should skip it: First, it's a daylight lens.
Summary: I wanted to like this lens so badly because I own another Sigma lens (10-20mm wide angle) and I love it. Unfortunately this one fell short. I read all the reviews-good and bad-and decided to take a chance. Unfortunately the 'bad' reviews were dead on in my opinion. I purchased this lens over the Canon version specifically because of the macro feature.
Summary: I wanted to get a Nikor 70-300mm like my Mom's but got the bait and switch deal from an unnamed online store. The lens itself is a bit lighter, and has a strong motor to it. It's loud, but not bad. The macro option is a good touch too. Didn't find any problems with color. I recommend using a tripod anyway. This thing has no vibration reduction that I know of, but maybe it's just in there.
Summary: The autofocus motor on the lens broke within 30 days. Good thing it broke within the return policy's terms. Anyway, it's a pretty good lens. It has really good image quality, nice bokeh. It has a nice, matte, feel to it. Only if the autofocus motor was a bit sturdier. I read the reviews and saw the problems with the autofocus, but bought it anyway because I was enticed by the price. Don't waste your money and buy a Nikon lens.
Summary: So a couple weeks ago my son bought this lens through my account, and he LOVED it. He would use it to take these amazing pictures. Then just yesterday, the autofocus motor stopped working. It lasted just long enough for him to really become attached to it... You get what you pay for, so do yourself a favor and get a better lens.
Summary: the price is certainly right and it seems to work mechanically fine. However, many pix are out of focus, especially at focal length 300. they were hand held but it was very bright so the shutter speed was quite fast. I also wonder if the color reproduction is not suboptimal. since i am color blind, and don't have a tripod, I am not entirely sure about either of these comments, but i certainly see a difference between the quality of pix between this lens and the nikon vr...
Shoddy construction and performance make this two thumbs down from me
Cynthia Farr-weinfeld "Cynthia", Amazon
2 April 2010
Summary: I have heard so many good things about Sigma's 17-70mm street zoom from other photographers, that I stupidly trusted the reviews on this lens. I needed it for a shoot of a President Obama speech, and ended up being unable to use it when I received it. Not only was it difficult to get it to focus at the best of times, whether handheld or on a sturdy Manfrotto tripod, with shake reduction on or off, it also got completely stuck in macro mode--I could NOT get the toggle...
Summary: Let me start by saying this is a great lens for the money as far as image quality and macro features and most reviews here are accurate. But apparently they didn't have the disapointing problem I ran into. After only about 3 days of normal use the autofocus failed and would only turn in one direction. I sent it back for an exchange (Amazon did the exchange with no hassle) and the replacement worked fine for a few days of shooting high school football and wildlife.
Summary: This lens works with a tripod and clear daylight. If that's what you are interested in, you should go for it. The shots of the moon, I took turned out to be disappointing. I did use a tripod, but it doesn't seem to work very well at night.