Nikon with the Nikon TC-17e II
Sigma with the Soligor 1.7x (older, non-DG)
Both sharp. Sigma has less contrast, thus the more apparent noise from the auto level correction.
Nikon has more magnification
Biggest difference is AF speed
Sigma is great for macros with 0.33x magnification (at 1.20m) vs the Nikon's 0.24x (at 1.4m)With the 1.7x the Sigma has a magnification of 0.56x making it a very good macro lens for skittish subjects that need you to keep your distance.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u...f/Nikon 300mm and Sigma 300mm/Nikon 510mm.JPG
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u...f/Nikon 300mm and Sigma 300mm/Sigma 510mm.jpg
For half the cost of the Nikon (both used) the Sigma is a very sharp lens for some uses. Mostly macros and static subjects, maybe even birds in flight BUT without a TC as AF is too slow with the tele-converter
More tests to follow when the weather permits
Sigma with the Soligor 1.7x (older, non-DG)
Both sharp. Sigma has less contrast, thus the more apparent noise from the auto level correction.
Nikon has more magnification
Biggest difference is AF speed
Sigma is great for macros with 0.33x magnification (at 1.20m) vs the Nikon's 0.24x (at 1.4m)With the 1.7x the Sigma has a magnification of 0.56x making it a very good macro lens for skittish subjects that need you to keep your distance.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u...f/Nikon 300mm and Sigma 300mm/Nikon 510mm.JPG
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u...f/Nikon 300mm and Sigma 300mm/Sigma 510mm.jpg
For half the cost of the Nikon (both used) the Sigma is a very sharp lens for some uses. Mostly macros and static subjects, maybe even birds in flight BUT without a TC as AF is too slow with the tele-converter
More tests to follow when the weather permits