Is APO Really needed on 70-300mm Sigma

[lynweber]

I am looking at the 70-300mm sigma with built in macro for my camera but is the APO really necessary does it do anything better than the non-apo?

Reason is that on ebay they have the non apo version cheaper and I am all about saving money.

[RLucas]

I would say if you are mainly doing Macro with it, the non APO version COULD be ok. APO reduces chromatic abberation, so you can spend less time trying to fix it in post.
Look at some high contrast images taken with it, mainly tree branches against a light sky. You will see purple or red fringing around the tree limbs. If you can live with this, I say go for it. If not, spring for the APO.

[lynweber]

Originally Posted by RLucas

I would say if you are mainly doing Macro with it, the non APO version COULD be ok. APO reduces chromatic abberation, so you can spend less time trying to fix it in post.
Look at some high contrast images taken with it, mainly tree branches against a light sky. You will see purple or red fringing around the tree limbs. If you can live with this, I say go for it. If not, spring for the APO.

Ok looks like I'm going with APO I dont need more time post processing...LOL

[bono]

Just be careful if you buy a lens, it must have an AF motor integrated. If not, it is only manual focus on a D5000.

[lynweber]

Originally Posted by bono

Just be careful if you buy a lens, it must have an AF motor integrated. If not, it is only manual focus on a D5000.

right i always ask too.

[vandergus]

If you already have the 55-200mm, that Sigma isn't going to get you much more capability. The so called "macro" ability is not all that great. It may be able to focus a little closer than your other lenses but the image quality probably won't be great at those distances. I'd go for a dedicated macro lens, maybe an older manual focus one if you don't want to spend a lot of money.