Which Lense 300mm

[Darkninja462]

Looking to upgrade my telephoto to a 300mm as need some extra power for nature

Been looking around and there seems to be about 5 that I can get (money is an issue) so cheaper the better ones I've seen around are :


TAMRON 70-300 F4 - 5.6 Di LD Macro SON [~£129.99


SIGMA 28-300 F3.5- 6.3 SON DG Macro [~£248.97] (don't really want to spend this much )

SIGMA 70-300 F4 - 5.6 APO Macro SON [~£174.99] (Heard about gear shredding with this lens)

SIGMA 70-300 F4 - 5.6 SON Macro [~£124.99]

SONY 75-300 F4.5 - 5.6 AF [~£178]

Which would be the best ? and why ? for the ~£250 lens what benefits would I get over that one ?

Currently Have:
Sony Alpha 350
Sony 3.5-5.6 18-70mm
Sony 4 -5.6 55-200mm

Advice would be greatly appreciated

Regards

Ninja

[Dodge]

The minolta 'big beercan' 75-300 might be worth looking at too, just have to make sure its the right one as theres been several made over the years, the later ones seem inferior if dyxum is anything to go by although probably as good as those you listed, just the original one seems to stand out if you can find one.

Minolta*AF 75-300 F4.5-5.6 Reviews at Dyxum.com

[DonSchap]

that the TAMRON AF 70~300mm f/4-5.6 Di LD MACRO (Minolta/SONY-mount) ($129) offers some of the best results for the money and may have the "best bang for the buck" out there as far as lenses go.

While certainly not capable of matching the sharp results you could get from the SONY 70~300mm f/4.5-5.6 G SSM ($849), you are not paying nearly as much for it, either.

The next lens consideration for "bang for the buck" would be the TAMRON AF18-250mm f/3.5-6.3 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) ($469) super zoom, for a one lens solution to your photography. It does cost a bit more, but it crosses the threshold of nearly all focal lengths, too. That has some serious benefits and a couple compromises.

And finally, the best results for the normal range would be the TAMRON SP AF 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di-II LD Aspherical (IF) ($449) lens, which offer a brighter indoor option and sharpness that usuually is only found in the higher end SONY CZ 16-35mm f/2.8 ($1899) or CZ 24-70mm F/2.8 ($1599)

Anyway, the TAMRON 70-300 would be my choice if I had to make it, based on a serious budget shortfall. I have had a few lenses in my day.

Good luck

[Charmed]

I currently have the TAMRON 70-300, it cost me £122 and I really like it. Both for the telephoto and macro settings. Good quality for the price.

[Heyho]

Hi Folks. First post here, and as this place seems to have a million sub sections, I guess this is a good a place as any to start!

I recently purchased a Minolta 100-300mm APO for £150 from an ebay seller. Granted it is somewhat of a risk buying 2nd hand from a distance, but sometimes it pays off. The reviews on Dyxum appear to rate this lens pretty highly, and put it close to a "G" lens optically, and unlike the budget zooms, is pretty sharp wide open at 300mm. I haven't been out with it much yet, but here is a recent moon shot I was quite pleased with: