Filter Reviews

I wanted to use this lens with my Canon EOS-10D and I was shocked with its performance. The AF only works for objects closer than 4 feet and it does not focus on objects farther than that. First, Sigma told me that the serial number I bought was old and the lens needed updating for it to work with Canon digital SLR Cameras. I have no idea why they distribute outdated lenses to their resellers.. That's not all, I tried manual focus, and the photos came out very soft even at very small apertures (large f-stop number)

After 4 weeks I get the lens back from Sigma in the same condition. I can only call this horrible service and a very bad product.

My recommendation is pay a little extra and either go for the Canon EF 15mm f/2.8 fisheye or the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 (which I did).

i am a fisheye lens addict. i have had this lens for a few months now, and i use it for almost everything. the lens was worth every bit i payed for it. and the sigma customer service was so fast and easy. the lens takes clear sharp pictures everytime. this lens takes the best skateboarding and band pictures! if you are considering this lens, i would definately reccomend it. i love how the pictures can either be circular or full frame. its a great investment.......

Similar considerations apply to Canon, so here is what I said about the 500mm f4.5 Sigma vs similar glass from Nikon:

The Sigma gets decent reviews, but for the same price you can get a brand-new 400mm f3.5 Nikkor (or a used 500mm f4P Nikkor). THese are sharper, faster, and (IMPORTANT!) better-built. Add a TC-14b teleconverter for about 10% more and you also have a 560mm f5 (or 700mm f5.6) that is sharper than the Sigma. A used 400mm f3.5 Nikkor is maybe $1500 to $2000 (this is the choice most people should make, but be sure you can return it if it's a clinker).

A BIGGIE: The resale value of the Nikkor is much better. I could (but never will) sell my Nikkors (bought used) for more than I paid after using them for years.

The only "advantage" of the Sigma is Autofocus, which may not work all that well if other reviewers' comments or my experience with a Sigma 400mm f5.6 are any indication. However, if you are a high-end sports freak or flying bird weenie, you already own high-end AF gear, or will be frustrated until you do. Most other subjects don't need AF. Indeed, in a recent butterfly hunt in a wildflower plot, I got consistently better slides in manual mode than an experienced friend with new Nikon AF gear. It's pretty tricky to get the AF to focus on the butterfly's head instead of its back wing or the flower petals.

Also, the 500mm Sigma weighs almost 7 lb, more than the far more versatile Nikkor + TC-14b combination. (A 400mm f2.8 AF Nikkor weighs 14 lb! What price AF?)

Bottom line: Buy the good stuff -- you get better performance and save money (because of resale value).

I am a wildlife photographer in South Africa and I briefly owned both the Nikon and Canon versions of this lens. I used the lens on a Nikon F100 body and found that it did not autofocus properly, due to presumably software conflict between the lens and the body. I swopped it for the Canon version, but it had the same problem when used with the EOS 3. The Nikon version did not autofocus with the Sigma 1.4 and 2.0 APO extenders. The Canon version did focus with the Sigma 1.4 extender, but not with the 2.0. THe lens has exceptionally good optics, and resolution, contrast and colour saturation is excellent. The build-quality is not bad, but not up to the same standard as the equivalent Canon lens. The large tripod mount is very handy, and the lens is very well balanced when used on a tripod. THe lens is very well priced, but unless Sigma ensures that it functions perfectly with the latest top end Canon and Nikon SLR's, it will not be an option for pro's or serious amateurs.

This lens is a 52mm mount for 8mm camcorders only. I don't know who put this in the digital cameras, but obviously they don't have a clue. I have to return mine!

I used this teleconverter on Sony's dsc-70 digital still camera and I am still using it on the dsc-75 and with success. It lengthens 105 mm zoom to 210 mm! AF and shutter/diafragma program functions stay perfect - I do not understand why Sony does not recommend it for still cameras; the only limitation is that you cannot zoom fully out (to maximum whith) because then vignetting occurs. But that can be seen on the camera's back screen so that you exactly know the limits, too.

This is the first time I purchased a product by Tiffen. I'm using this UV Protection filter mainly for the protection of my new lens, and I assume most people purchase a UV filter for the same reason. The main drive for me to choose this product is because of the reduced price and the 10-year warranty. Being a simple UV filter, there aren't any extra effects except the advertised "Helps eliminate bluish cast in images." My prints just came back, and I can't really see too much of a difference with my untrained eyes.

This filter is an excellent brand and is of high quality. Does exactly what it is suppose to do and it will last a long time. I have used this brand filter for many years and have many sizes for all my cameras. If you don't have one of these on your camera, you should!

We own this lens for several years using it on Nikon F70. I was very disappointed with the over-all quality (esp. sharpness) of the lens. Tamron 28-200 lens is supposed to be also on the "lower" end of the quality scale - I tried it once and WHAT A HUGE DIFFERENCE compared to the 28-300. In other word: even the much critized Tamron 28-200 is better. Very likely a 28-300 even with reasonable compromise would unreasonably stretch the budget and perhaps the OEM of Vivitar (Vivitar does not have his lens factory) did the best they could for that money. I am curious, how good or bad is the 28-300 offering from Tamron. The Vivitar Series 1 IMHO does not deserve the "Series 1" name. I am affraid, in order to cover a long range with better quality one would still need 2 or even 3 lens.

It's all you need, great as a secound lens. Excelent for PRO and Amateur. Great value.

This 3M Filter is useful and is not expensive. It can protect your eye from the radiation and it also can reduce the glare, but the point is that filter comes with only one year warranty(not like some others with life time warranty)....

I had to visit the 3m website to find out more info. on this product. They had a chart and some info. The info. I was looking for was how much privacy was given. The only privacy built into this screen is for people trying to view from you right side or your left side. It gives them that black viewing screen. People directly behind you can read and see all of what your working on your computer. I find this to be a bit over priced. But with the free shipping I got at time of purchased made it worthwhile. Not enough of these privacy screens could be found at local office supply stores. Their catalogs were pricey! And not much info to go on either. Amazon should of put in their editorial in as well as the 3M description. On what and how these privacy screens work. (Percentage of screen info is filtered out of prying eyes.) Since their are quite a few type of privacy screens out their to choose from.