Next telephoto for EOS 20D - DPChallenge Forums

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

03/03/2005 03:29:45 PM · #1

Hi all,

I am considering a new lens for my EOS 20D camera. To give you some idea of the sort of pictures I take, I have a small gallery here:

//www.pbase.com/ovenbird/root

Currently I use an EF 100-400 IS lens but find that I often want something longer. I recently got the chance to try out a 500mm f/4L IS and really liked it but $5K+ is a little more than I care to spend at the moment.

I am considering the Sigma 50-500mm and maybe the EF 400mm f/5.6L with Tamron 1.4x TC.

Does anyone have any opinions about these lenses or any suggestions about other options I should be considering?

Thanks,

Tom

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

03/03/2005 03:38:32 PM · #2

Thomas - instead of the Sigma 50-500 I use the Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F5-6.3 Di LD (IF). I give up the short end for faster focus on the long end. I have never used it with a 1.4x TC but plan to. Likely it will require really good light to use and there is a good chance you will have to switch to manual focus with the TC. Here are some shots, mostly taken with the Tamron using a monopod.

PBase Site

akshayvh

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/03/2005 03:43:17 PM · #3

EF 100-400 IS, thats one heck of a lens. Why dont you just get a Canon 2x TC for that?

Corwyn

03/03/2005 04:03:22 PM · #4

Very nice shots..

I also use the 100-400 and would love more lenght... (For my Lens).

I think the teleconverters Are just to slow for a 5.6 lens and the Sigma is not the greatest either for the extra 160mm. I would recomend the 400 2.8 with the converters, 400mm 4 with the 1.4 converter or the 500/600 lenses.

My Shots lots with the 100-400

Message edited by author 2005-03-03 16:05:14.

03/03/2005 04:12:35 PM · #5

I'm gonna get some mud thrown for this, but this is my honest oppinion based on actual usage. The Sigma 50-500 is not worth having for nature photography. It's not as contrasty as some of Sigma's better glass and it has a nasty design flaw that allows zoom creep. I'm usually pretty happy on the day I get a new lens, but I was much happier the day I sold that one.

Corwyn

03/03/2005 04:13:30 PM · #6

Originally posted by nsbca7:

I agree With you on this

03/03/2005 04:17:10 PM · #7

I am not very familiar with the Tamron lens. Have you used the Sigma 50-500 before? From what I can tell it is very fast focusing with its HSM. Does the Tamron have some equivalent to HSM or is it a regular DC motor?

Thanks for the input, faster focus would certainly be a plus.

As far as the 2x TC is concerned, the 100-400 IS wasnâ��t really designed to work with TCâ��s. I have tried using it with a Tamron-F 1.4X TC and gotten OK results with it but I really hope for something better. I have found that the focus slows down a bit with the TC in place and isnâ��t always as accurate as it is with no TC. I have also tried the Canon 1.4x II TC with this lens and had to tape over some of the contacts to get the lens to AF. The AF feels a lot slower and sometimes oscillates about a focus setting instead of actually locking on.

Based on this experience I havenâ��t even bothered to try a 2x TC with the lens as it will be an additional stop darker than the 1.4x is and I expect AF will be pretty much unusable unless I have really good light.

I could be wrong so that is why I am asking.

Tom

03/03/2005 04:20:58 PM · #8

Yes those would definitely be ideal solutions if I (1) had the money for them and (2) could carry them around all day and use them hand-held.

The 400mm f/4 DO IS seems like it would be a super lens for hand-held photography but wow the cost is high!

As I mentioned before I have used the 500 and it is a super lens but it a bit heavy and a lot expensive.

Thanks for your input.

Tom

Originally posted by Corwyn:

03/03/2005 04:26:24 PM · #9

For those of you who donâ��t like the Sigma 50-500, could you elaborate more about why you didnâ��t like it. This was actually the lens I was strongly considering. From the examples I have seen that were produced by this lens I was under the impression that the image quality was very good.

Also, I was under the impression that there was a zoom-lock switch to prevent zoom creep, is this not the case?

Is there anything else I should k now about this lens? Is it much bigger/heavier than the 100-400 IS? Also, do you feel that you need a tripod with this lens, or is it one that you could hand-hold under decent conditions.

Thanks,

Tom

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/03/2005 04:35:28 PM · #10

Sigma 300 f2.8 with 2x will work for birds.
Another thing,Canon 20 D autofocus works with f5.6 or faster lenses.
1.4 X tele on f5.6 lens will make it f 8 ,for that you need D1 camera.

Message edited by author 2005-03-03 16:41:30.

03/03/2005 04:37:08 PM · #11

Originally posted by ovenbird:

It is not a fast focusing lens. Perhaps I was used to the focus speed of the Sigma 70-200 EX lens I was using at the time but the 50-500 seemed to hunt a lot. This problem I think is inherent with lenses with a long zoom range, but it will cost you shots all the same.

Tamron has a 200-500 zoom that may be better suited to what you are doing.
Unlike the 50-500 this lens has internal focus. That means the lens neither extends nor contracts physically when focusing. What that means to you is that the focus rate should be faster as there is less glass to move.

I have never used the Tamron lens so I can't account for image quality. Perhaps someone here has one and can let you know how it is.

03/03/2005 04:41:40 PM · #12

Originally posted by ovenbird:

Also, I was under the impression that there was a zoom-lock switch to prevent zoom creep, is this not the case?

What's the point of having a zoom lens if you have to lock and unlock it to zoom? Point that lens down when it's not locked and it drops out to 500 loud and fast.

03/03/2005 05:01:32 PM · #13

I just checked the B&H site and wasnâ��t able to find the Sigma 300mm f/2.8. Were you referring to the 120-300mm f/2.8 EX? If not, what is the price like on the 300mm f/2.8? Is this a discontinued lens? If so would it need to be re-chipped to work on the 20D? Also, which 2X TC do you use?

Nice shot of the pigeon!

Thanks,

Tom

Originally posted by pitsaman:

Sigma 300 f2.8 with 2x will work for birds.
Another thing,Canon 20 D autofocus works with f5.6 or faster lenses.
1.4 X tele on f5.6 lens will make it f 8 ,for that you need D1 camera.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

03/03/2005 05:12:17 PM · #14

Based on the reviews I have seen of the Sigma or "Bigma" the AF is very fast (on the level of the 70-200mm f/2.8 EX) Of course these could just be hot air.

I was also under the impression that the Sigma didnâ��t change length during focusing, only during zooming. Does the Tamron change length during zooming? My understanding of internal focusing lenses (which I think both the Tamron and the Sigma are) is that they use one of the smaller internal or rear lens groups to achieve focus. As you stated the smaller/lighter group is easier to move so you get faster focusing. How do you know that the Tamron uses a smaller group? Is this published somewhere? I am just trying to get all my facts correct so I donâ��t buy a lens that I need to sell or return right away.

Finally, I still donâ��t understand what the problem is with the zoom lock. Maybe I just need to see the lens to understand the problem. It would seem that when I am just carrying the lens around I would have it locked so it wonâ��t creep. When I am using the lens to take pictures I would unlock it and zoom to the FL I want, take the pictures and then lock the lens again when I am back underway.

Thanks for your thoughtful comments,

Tom

akshayvh

Canon EOS-7D

03/03/2005 05:22:46 PM · #15

While we are on this topic, any inputs on the Sigma 170 - 500? I was considering it for my next purchase. It comes at a reasonable price but ofcourse, Its not a fast lens.

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

03/03/2005 05:26:27 PM · #16

My buddies shots with the bigma on the Minolta 7D:
The Moon and the 3 hawks are done with the bigma.

//www.pbase.com/hotduck/nature

As far as AF on the bigma he complained a bit yesterday (shooting the 3 hawks), I could lock faster (20D with Tamron 28-300mm 3.5-6.3 XR Di LD (if)) and get more shots off then he did.

However the Pics I have seen from that lens are quite sharp. The short end of the Bigma is gimmick as the are way too soft (per my buddy). I'm not impressed with my Tamron 28-300mm XR Di LD at all compared to the bigma (sharpness).

BTW: His shots were handheld.

Message edited by author 2005-03-03 17:27:32.

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

03/03/2005 05:32:23 PM · #17

Originally posted by akshayvh:

While we are on this topic, any inputs on the Sigma 170 - 500? I was considering it for my next purchase. It comes at a reasonable price but ofcourse, Its not a fast lens.

I've used it. The image quality is acceptable, although not great. Auto-focus hunts like crazy. The zoom is stiff to operate. Despite this, the zoom drops down (extends) when the lens is pointed downward.

Great price for this focal range, but a compromise, IMO.

500 $ rebate on Tamron 300mm f2.8

03/03/2005 05:54:26 PM · #18

Originally posted by ovenbird:

It would seem that when I am just carrying the lens around I would have it locked so it wonâ��t creep. When I am using the lens to take pictures I would unlock it and zoom to the FL I want, take the pictures and then lock the lens again when I am back underway.

How about having to lock it while you are taking pictures? Wasn't fun for me. I don't know, maybe you just always keep your camera level when you are shooting but the birds around here go up in trees and fly through the air.

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

03/03/2005 06:23:03 PM · #19

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS

03/03/2005 07:49:41 PM · #20

I'd go looking for a good used copy of the Canon 300/2.8 IS. Even the new price of that one is not that outrageous, and it is one of the very best lenses that Canon has ever offered. Reportedly it does very well with a 1.4xII or even 2.0xII TC, so should give all the reach you desire and IS to boot.
It is not a light lens, but can be hand-held without too much strain, like the 400 DO IS but unlike the longer "great whites".

jbsmithana

Nikon D300

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor 12-24mm f/4.0G IF-ED

03/03/2005 08:13:59 PM · #21

Thomas - I mentioned the Tamron SP AF 200-500mm F5-6.3 Di LD (IF) as an alternative to the Bigma earlier in this conversation. First, it is hard to have this discussion by trying to compare lenses that cost 4 to 7 times more than the Sigma or Tamron do. Like you, I could not afford the a better lens, in my case a Nikon 200-400 VR for over $5k.

As for IF it means as you said, the focus is internal but the lens does move when zooming. I have no problems with AF hunt during good light but DO have problems with hunt in low light. This is expected in both these lenes. Also, the lens is soft. You can get good shots in good light but they will need some sharpening.

Again, below are examples using a monopod. The exif data is attached to the shots.

Some Example Shots

bledford

Canon EOS-300D Rebel

Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

03/03/2005 08:22:17 PM · #22

There is always the $650 200mm 2.8L with a 1.4 or 2x converter giving you 280mm or 400 respectively. Quite an inexpensive option that I'm considering myself, if you're willing to use a tripod and higher ISO/shutter speed combinations (ie. no IS).

Message edited by author 2005-03-03 20:22:36.