APO VS NON APO LENSES

Good morning could one of my knowledgeable friends please explain the difference between an APO and a non APO lens, is it worth spending the extra money on the APO lens

 

Hi Steve well I am afraid that it is an important consideration for yours truly ,as the lens would be a Christmas gift to me and I would like to know if the extra £50 or so for the APO is really necessary ,hope this explains the reason for my question

 

Hi Woo, what Steve has said is spot on about the photographic evidence against the advertising blurb.
I have the 150-500mm Sigma DG APO HS F5-F6.3 lens........sounds good doesn't it.?? I bought it not because of the APO designation but because it was going at a bargain price and was in mint condition, and whether or not it was a APO didn't come into it.
The original purpose of giving lenses an "APO coating" was technical in that it is/was considered by the Manufacturers to bring the 3 primary colours into focus, whereas, according to theory, uncoated lens brought 2 of the primary lenses into focus, with the intention making the lens sharper. Any of that I can't back up as I'm not that expert in the technicalities of light, and low dispersion lenses.
The APO coating in the Sigma lens and others was brought in to reduce any minor aberrations especially when using the lens at long range. However, not having used a non APO equivalent lens I can't compare one to the other. But I do suspect that for the likes of the Wildlife enthusiast who enjoys taking images of birds etc, and is not worried, about the technical aspects there is nothing noticeable between the two lenses, and you would have to start pixel peeping, do comparable technical resolution tests before you could give an opinion on them. I would therefore not put too much importance in the designations that are given in modern lenses which, as Steve infers, could be there as a marketing device to make a lens sound more attractive than it's competitors.
As Steve says you haven't indicated which lens you are considering and knowing that might help Steve and I to give what advice we can.

 

This reply is in no way intended to offend anyone just my sense of humour

Thank you Armandll my friend, All I wanted to know is an APO lens worth the extra money all I keep getting is a Politician's answer,A thousand words when just ten will do

Just a simple answer to a simple man

The lenses are as follows
Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Mac
---------------------------------------------------------
Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DG Macro
---------------------------------------------------------
Sigma AF 70-300mm f4-5.6 DG APO Macro
----------------------------------------------------------
Canon EF 75 -300mm f/ 4.5 111 Lens
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CanonEF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS

 

I think Steve and I's lengthy replies were an attempt to do justice to you and give you a possibly more explanatory answer to the APO aspect!!!.
I take it since you're going to the 300mm range you're thinking about some wildlife shots??? To be honest, I'd save yourself the money difference and get a non APO lens. I like the Tamron 70-300mm Macro lens, but be warned that the term Macro is really a misnomer as none of the lenses you have mentioned are really true Macro. For that it is better to get a true macro fixed focal lens. Also note, which I'm sure you know already, that used at the maximum 300 range they tend to suffer a little and lose some sharpness, but that also applies to the 500mm range as well.

 

Thank you Armandll my friend ,for all your valuable input and help it is really appreciated as always,I have taken your advice on board and once again many thanks

 

Let us all know if you decide to buy a lens, Woo, and how you get on with it..........and of course some shots taken with it.

 

Hi Armandll I've narrowed it down to two.Canon EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II its not as long being 250mm but it has image stabilisation (IS) where as the Tamron 70-300mm F4/5.6 DI LD Mac doesn't but its 300mm

 

I've forgotten what camera you have, Woo, but doesn't it have image stabilisation in the camera itself????. Sigma make a separate model for Pentax in that they leave out the image stabilisation in the lenses due to the fact that it's in the camera already.

 

Hi Armandll the lens will be for my Canon 600D,the image stabilisation is in the lenses

 

Understood, Woo, unfortunately the 600D doesn't image stabilisation within the camera and therefore Canon supplies IS in the lenses. I'll be honest and say that I prefer it to be within the camera as it gives a bigger range and more freedom of lenses that can be used. While Image Stabisation is a nice thing to have a steady hand and fast shutter speed will compensate for the lack of it.

 

Hi Armandll most of my work apart from the fascination I have for birds in flight is done using a tripod,thank you for all your reply' s my friend

 

Then I would go for the Tamron 300mm lenses,Woo...............but it's all down to personal taste and inclination.!!