| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/18/2005 11:09:31 AM · #1 |
Most of my lenses are Canon. I shoot with a MkII. Main body of work is portraits, but want to do some wildlife, hence the purchase of the lens. I don't have it yet, but was wondering if anyone has it, and how they like it or dont.
Regards, |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 11:23:44 AM · #2 |
| i used to use the 170-500.. very similar type of thing (except mine was nikonmount of cause) I found the lens to be quite nice, it was never fast enough for sports but for wildlife I would say its a great lens for the price, it gets really sharp around f11 and I think it would be a good investment for you. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 11:39:41 AM · #3 |
i dont have it, but have read that those that do have it like it. they mainly say its not as fast on the auto focusing as a canon USM lens, but it still gives great results
James |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 12:00:45 PM · #4 |
| Here are some Challenge pics taken with the Sigma 50-500 Canon mount lens. Nearly all the bird/nature images in my portfolio were captured with this lens. Personally, I couldn't do without it. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 12:17:22 PM · #5 |
Thanks folks. I hope this is the last lens for a while. I need to get rid of my 70.200 2.8, and 35.350 4.5. They just sit in their cases on the floor. Their just not long enough for the Egrets ;)
I'm looking forward to throwing this puppy on the camera and taking it for a test drive.
Regards,
Sfalice... Nice work with that lens.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 12:20:02 PM · #6 |
You are going to get rid of your Canon 70-200mm f/2.8??? You will be disappointed with the images if you compare one at the same focal length and aperture with both 70-200 and 50-500...
Have you looked at the 300mm f/4 or even the 400mm f/5.6?
Message edited by author 2005-10-18 12:21:13.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 01:05:14 PM · #7 |
Well, I really bought the MkII & the 70.200 for one reason. Weddings. Ceremony specifically. Now I've got a wild hair to shoot wildlife. Just this past weekend, two bald eagles flew over my head, while I was walking around looking at Egrets.
Even with the 1.4TX, the 70.200 isn't long enough for me. So I'm thinking to myself. Sell the 70.200, and the 35.350. Throw some more money at that, and buy a nice 500mm prime.
Just thoughts. Since I don't really do wildlife for $$$, I don't need to be throwing serious money at Long Primes... |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 01:34:15 PM · #8 |
The Canon 400mm f/5.6L is only $60 more than the Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3
Message edited by author 2005-10-18 13:35:07.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 02:02:59 PM · #9 |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 03:42:00 PM · #10 |
| I wonder if the 1.4TX will work OK with it. I know it doesn't with my 35.350, but does with the 70.200. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 03:48:39 PM · #11 |
Originally posted by pfiltz:
I wonder if the 1.4TX will work OK with it. I know it doesn't with my 35.350, but does with the 70.200. |
With the 50-500?
TC's work best with fast primes and some fast zooms, even then there is some compromise in the quality of the resulting picture. With the 50-500mm, if it works you'll likely lose autofocus at the long end because it becomes a 700mm f/9, the 1D II can AF with max apertures as small as f/8
Message edited by author 2005-10-18 15:51:08. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 04:00:52 PM · #12 |
No with the 400 4.6L
Message edited by author 2005-10-18 16:01:05. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 04:36:39 PM · #13 |
Originally posted by pfiltz:
I wonder if the 1.4TX will work OK with it. I know it doesn't with my 35.350, but does with the 70.200. |
Probably not, at least as far as autofocus goes. That 1.4 will bring your max aperture to something like f/5.6 and that's really marginal for autofocus. I donno, I've never tried it at that extreme.
R.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 05:08:48 PM · #14 |
Originally posted by pfiltz:
I wonder if the 1.4TX will work OK with it. I know it doesn't with my 35.350, but does with the 70.200. |
It will work if it is a Sigma TX and you *lock* the lens at 200-500mm. You will smash the lens if it unlocks and retracts to 50mm. I used one on a slow duck once with manual focus, and then put the thing away and haven't experimented with it since. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 05:41:56 PM · #15 |
| I was just curious.... I'll probably stay away from using my tx on it.. |
|
|
|
10/18/2005 06:09:35 PM · #16 |
Originally posted by pfiltz:
No with the 400 4.6L |
The 1.4x will work on the 400 f/5.6 with your 1D II, the 1D II can AF with the center AF point with apertures as small as f/8.
|
|
|
|
10/18/2005 08:36:31 PM · #17 |
Bigma is a great value and very versatile.
You can check photozone.de for a review.
|
|
|
|
10/19/2005 12:34:03 PM · #18 |
I had looked at a 400, but since my 35.350 wasn't long enough, I skipped over the 400 options.
I've heard quite a bit about Bigma, just never really looked that deep into it. |
|
|
|
10/19/2005 12:51:26 PM · #19 |
| I would say the natural Canon analog to the Sigma 50-500 is the 100-400L with IS. The best thing about the bigma is the versitility, being able to fill the frame with a batter at the plate 75 yards away and then shoot some kid holding a foul ball 8 feet away is only possible with this lens. There is nothing else sold with this versitility, and yes, with that big a range it is no where near as sharp as a prime; however you can get both shots in succession, which you can't with a prime. I thought of replacing the bigma with the Canon 100-400, for the sake of the greater crispness, but I found that the majority of my shots end up in the 350-500mm range, with quite a few in the 50-100 range, and I would miss all those with either a prime or the Canon 100-400. If you want to have the shots you get be perfect, go with the 400mm prime, If you want to get most anything that interests you captured with quite good quality, I reccomend the Bigma. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 08/19/2025 02:55:31 PM EDT.
