Yesterday I took my D70 for a walk... let it try on some new clothes, specifically a 70-200 2.8 sigma, and a 80-200 2.8 nikon. For good measure I took a couple of pictures with a budget 70-300 APO sigma. All of the same subject, same focal length, appeture, etc, but from not quite the same angles (different shop doors).

Problem is I can't tell the difference. Even at 200% zoom.

Guess that saves me some money at least!

Yes, you are obviously mad and deluded.

Fancy taking out a few nice lenses and testing them under real picture-taking conditions ;)

What you need to do is shoot an entirely artificial test chart, at a focusing distance almost certain to emphasise any tiny flaws, pixel-peep the coners at full aperture and then moan about how crap this or that lens is. Then post on dpreview.com that you have a 'bad copy' :lol1:

Seriously, good on you mate. If it works for you WGAF :)

Richard.

I bought my 70-200 F2.8 AFS VR very cheap (£650) was using the Nikon 70-300 ED at the time. Did think about selling it for a profit as I didn't notice a huge real world difference to PQ. What made me keep it and sell the 300 was the much better focusing (AFS) especially on the D200, love using F2.8 for DOF and also the way the thing handles. No way I'd pay over a grand for it but it is a fantastic bit of kit. I've used the Sigma version too and at the price difference too I'd have the F2.8 lens.....

:)

you want to test a zoom?

stick on AF-C, and pan for a seagull or other bird in flight - then see what you get ;)

LOL @ Hoppy's post. I cannot believe how common an event this is, the amount of photo's that people post with rulers and set squares to prove that their lens is front focussing by 0.5mm is bizarre.

Why do people do this to themselves, I know that folks invest a significant amount of money into bodies and lenses, however in many cases all it exposes is bad technique.

Classic one is the I have just bought a fast prime lens and it is soft, (for this read I have not yet managed to get my focussing and composing technique to a sufficient level and I am throwing my subject out of focus).

Yes, you are obviously mad and deluded.

Fancy taking out a few nice lenses and testing them under real picture-taking conditions ;)

What you need to do is shoot an entirely artificial test chart, at a focusing distance almost certain to emphasise any tiny flaws, pixel-peep the coners at full aperture and then moan about how crap this or that lens is. Then post on dpreview.com that you have a 'bad copy' :lol1:

Seriously, good on you mate. If it works for you WGAF :)

Richard.

:lol1:

Brilliant :)

All that tracking seagulls tests is the AF speed.. and nobody shoots birds (flying ones at least) with a 200mm lens. Far too short :D

Seriously, I feel cheated!! I'd finally justified (to myself) spending that much on a lens.. I was expecting there to be a really noticable pop, but no. So now the only excuse I have is 2 more stops, faster a/f (usefullness moot, the cheapo tracks most stuff ok in real terms), and something that looks good - versus 100mm more reach, and 500quid in my pocket.

Guess I can't kid myself I need it any more, 'tis only a hobby after all.

Now where did I leave that ruler.....