 |
Sigma EX DG, 72 mm
by JJJJ
Today i'm taking a look at Sigma's 72mm UV filter - it's a product that I didn't start using until recently, as I normally opt for Hoya's Pro1 variety which was out of stock the last time I visited my local camera shop.
A filter explained
- - - - - - - - - - -
If you're unaware of what a filter is, or indeed what ... it does - it's simply a thin glass disc which screws onto the front of your camera's lens and offers protection combined with whatever is the filter's speciality. In this case it's a UV (ultra-violet) model which reduces ultra-violet light, and ultimately removes haze in your photos where the sun is prominant.
It's important to note that you'll need to purchase the correct size filter depending on the thread on your lens - this particular review focusses on the 72mm variety which has a current amazon price of £29.70. Compared to the Hoya Pro1 filter, the Sigma is very similar in terms of cost - but which is the better performer?
Advice and Performance
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
If you're using a decent UV filter, you can leave it on your camera at all times - this gives you the extra peace of mind that your valuable lens won't get scratched - would you rather damage a £25 piece of glass (the filter), or a £500 piece of glass (the lens)?
With a solid construction, i've found that the Sigma screws smoothly onto my lens and remains firmly in place. Photos taken using the filter are clear and without any degradation from the product's use. Haze is visibly reduced, and I can see no real difference between the Sigma and the Hoya in terms of performance. The only qualm I have is the fact that it scratches a little easily - don't get me wrong, i've subjected this filter to a lot of rough treatment when my camera has been resting against fence posts / trees etc - it's just that that the Hoya filter seems a little more resilient, and i've used both products for the same amount of time.
Final Word
- - - - - - -
Overall, the Sigma's 72mm UV filter is a decent product which does exactly what it is supposed to do - but would I buy it again? To be honest the answer is "probably not"; i'll revert back to the Hoya Pro1 when this needs replacing - it simply feels like it's a little more likely to get damaged over an extended period of time.
Read the complete review |
 |
Nikon 70-300mm Lens
by JJJJ
For all you avid nature watchers out there, animal spotting is a lot easier if you've got the tools to get as close to your subject as possible - and a zoom lens is essential piece of photographic equipment. The Nikon 70-300mm VR is a great choice for those on a budget - and although £300 may not sound like a budget price, believe me ... there are much, much pricer zoom lenses on the market. It's important to note that this review is for the VR model (as it's the one shown in dooyoo's picture) as opposed to the non-VR 70-300mm lens which can be bought for around £150 less. Quite simply 'VR' stands for 'vibration reduction', and this allows the effects of wobbly hands to be significantly reduced.
Specification and Design
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Although the lens has a far-reaching 300mm zoom, on the whole it isn't that versatile as an all-in-one choice - this is because the 70mm starting point is too telephoto to suit landscape photographers who'll want a wider angle to work with. For me, a 50-300mm would be much more efficient, and mean that I don't need to switch lenses as much as I currently do. There is actually a Nikon 28-300mm lens on the market, but it's a bit out of my budget at around £700. Back to the 70-300 VR, and it's a fairly light lens for its size - this is down to its mainly plastic construction (apart from the metal lens mount), which is what keeps the cost relatively low. That said, the lens does feel well made and has a certain robustness about it. Most importantly the glass used in the lens is top notch, and like the majority of Nikon's other kit lenses, the overall quality is very impressive. The maximum aperture at 70mm is f4.5, and this rises to f5.6 by the time you reach the telephoto end of the zoom; because of this, the lens isn't a great low light performer.
Performance - optical tests
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
First of all let's talk about the zoom ring - this large rubberised grip can be turned quickly and easily, although tiny adjustments can be a little tricky due to the fact that it can stick a little when you first turn it. Although it's auto focus by default, manual focus is an option with the lens, and this is done by turning the smaller ring towards the back of the product. The lens (which takes 67mm filters) is fairly quick to focus, although it can sometimes struggle a little in dim conditions. Regarding the image quality, images are sharp throughout the zoom range and there's hardly any vignetting (darkness at the corners of your image) in evidence. Other chromatic abberations are pretty much non-existent, and the overall image quality is very pleasing.
Final Word - worth the money?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Overall, I would highly recommend Nikon's 70-300mm VR - it's a great choice for wildlife photographer, offering a long zoom combined with a light weight and reliability. Yes there are some minor niggles, but as I said in my opening paragraph, this is a budget offering and there are always going to be slight compromises made in terms of the build quality. The price is very reasonable for what you get, although if you haven't got quite as much to spend then the Nikon 55-200mm VR may be a cheaper fall-back option (it costs around £150 less).
Read the complete review |
 |
Hoya R72, 52 mm
by MrMonochrome
I'd been using my first DSLR for a while when I stumbled across some images of Infra Red photography and was amazed by the strange perspective it gave of the world. There were 2 routes I could take to start producing shots in IR, first I could dismantle my camera and remove the IR cut filter or use an R72 filter on the front of the ... lens.
Conversion is a permanent option so I bought the lens filter and I have been delighted with the results.
The filter is a very, very dark red which blocks out most of the normal spectrum of visible light so when on the camera the viewfinder and LCD screen are useless. This means you have to compose the picture and set the focus before attaching the filter then carefully put the filter on making sure you don't adjust the focussing ring. With virtually all visible light now blocked from the camera sensor you need to increase exposure lengths dramically to allow sufficient IR light through to create an image. How long depends on the camera being used and how sensitive it is to IR, but as an idea on a D5000 it can be up to 20-30 seconds. Obviously this means a tripod and cable release are needed so using the filter eliminates any chance of getting shots of anything that is moving or any candid snaps of people.
Images produced are coloured red, but with a quick bit of tweaking in Photoshop to the RGB levels and a bit of finishing off in Lightroom the IR images really come to life. Many of the pictures available on the internet are of trees, grass and lakes but IR works really well in a more urban setting as well. The thing to do, as with most photographic techniques, is experiment and find what subject works for you.
To get the best out of using it you also need to set a custom white balance on the camera and be prepared for plenty of practice before the technique of IR all falls into place, but when it does work the images you can get are stunning.
A lot of my filters are made by Hoya and I've always found them to be of great quality so I have no problem in recomending the R72 to anyone looking for an inexpensive way to try IR.
Read the complete review |
