Sigma 100-300 EX. Nikon D70 and F801s

Miles Escow , Jul 05, 2004; 02:20 p.m.

My Sigma 70-300mm APO MACRO lens recently broke and I need to replace it. I was never particularly happy with this lens, and I have wanted to upgrade it to something faster. I occasionally use it with a Kenko 2X teleconverter and so something that is a little longer or that is compatible with a decent AF teleconverter would be great.

However, having looked at Sigma's 100-300 EX and similar lenses, I realised that my Nikon F801s isn't even capable of getting these lenses to autofocus.

So it seems that in order to get a better lens for wildlife etc I will have to upgrade my camera too. That is no mean feat for me as it means I have to change a whole series of other items, such as my underwater housing (Subal), my SB24 etc.

Even then I believe that the 100-300 EX lens won't autofocus with Sigma's own 2X EX teleconverter.

Due to all of this I am considering buying a D70 but I am concerned about the small viewfinder and the general point that film is roughly equivalent to an 11 megapixel image. The D70 may take nicely detailed pictures but it still isn't 11 megapixels.

At the moment I scan all of my best shots on a Canoscan FS400US that produces 110MB files so I would be happy enough to change to a digital camera. I have been reluctant to do that until now as 11 megapixel cameras of a similarly robust build to the F801s are incredibly expensive (Fuji s3).

So, is it true? Will I have to fork out a huge amount of money to replace my lens with something better? Does anybody have any suggestions?

Responses

Chris Combs , Jul 05, 2004; 03:00 p.m.

Eleven megapixels is a voodoo number. There's no real way to translate film into a fixed number of megapixels, because every film and scanner is different. Get an example frame from, say, dpreview.com of the D70, then open it up in Photoshop and see how the resolution and grain compares to what you're used to from the FS400.

Chris Haake , Jul 05, 2004; 03:27 p.m.

Miles, I have two suggestions:

1. Buy the D70 (or something compatible) but keep all your other equipment for use with your UW housing etc; or

2. Go to KEH.com and buy a used Tokina 100-300 f4. Same specs as the Sigma, built like a tank, fast internal focus, internal zoom, and the optics are fantastic! I've used mine now for several months and I just could NOT be happier. Google around for this lens, and you'll find that others love it, too...a couple said they'd rather have this than the Nikkor 80-200 f2.8 (which I don't have, so I can't back it up). At any rate, you can get it for around $330 in EX condition, and it should be compatible with your present camera.

Whatever you wind up doing, have fun!

Richard Laepple , Jul 05, 2004; 03:57 p.m.

1st: I have no doubt my D70 gives me better results as any 35mm Nikon I used in the past. I think I can see this with my own eyes. I am/have no lab to make boring tests. I just take images. Looking at images with my own eyes is the only way of looking at images I'm interested in. 2nd: The finder of the D70 is no problem for me. As I can hear/read from other people, the most get used to it. 3rd: The best idea is to compare test shots taken with a D70 and a Canon 1 DS. Got to a review website or to the next bigger photo shop.

Miles Escow , Jul 12, 2004; 08:50 a.m.

Thanks for your replies.

Chris, I disagree with your comment that you can't translate film into megapixels. Most photographers when talking about 'film' and making these comparisons mean Fuji Velvia 50. Consumer scanning can be done at up to 4000 dpi which is more than enough to reveal the grain of even smooth films such as Provia and Velvia. Comparisons have been made between the resolution and sharpness achievable using sensors and film and the limitations of grain and noise. Have a look at www.normankoren.com for more on all of that. The short rebuttal to yor calling 11 megapixels voodoo is why are there so many 22 megapixel medium format backs on the market if that kind of resolution isn't necessary? I and many others make prints larger than A3. In my opinion the D70 isn't really capable of making gallery size and quality prints.

Chris II, I will probably end up doing what you suggest, either one or the other, but not the Tokina lens. I would rather get my Sigma repaired as its around about the same quality.

Richard, are you looking at on-screen images or prints? I agree that nothing more scientific than your eyes are necessary, but I need a camera that can produce large, noise free prints with no apparent quirks in the quality.

I am also waiting for a full sized sensor to be put into a decently priced dSLR, so that one can still take wide angle shots and doesn't need to buy a whole new set of lenses.

Tony Bynum , Jul 13, 2004; 09:25 a.m.

I own the 100-300 f/4 hsm and d70. the 100-300 f/4 sigma is capable of producing great images. However, mine does not foucus properly (auto) with the D70. Sigma tells me that the lens is compatible and will work properaly. I dissagre, at least with my lens and camera. I've sent the lens in along with about 20 shots using both manual and auto focus. The manual focus is better than auto in my case. The test shots were compared with my 80-400 vr. So far, Sigma has done nothing but jerk me arround and have concluded that my camera is the problem - I say Bull!

I've shot 1000's of images with my nikkor vr 80-400 and my pro lenses and have never had an auto focus problem. When I compair the sigma with the nikkor they are very different. The color is also not so good with the Sigma.

My lens is still at Sigma (going on 1.5 months) at a cost of $900 I cant afford to own a lens that does not work with my d70 and is in the shop durring my shooting season ( I shoot rodeo and horse racing). The bottom line is your taking a chance with any non nikkor lens. I'm affraid I got a $900 lens that aint worth a damn!

Notify me of Responses