170-500mm sigma..... - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

02/11/2004 09:35:39 PM · #1

anyone have one? I just got mine...wahoo it's big! Do you find it hard to switch tripod from cam to lens?

hsteg

Fujifilm X-T20

02/11/2004 09:36:40 PM · #2

how big... is...big?

Jacko

Canon EOS-20D

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

02/11/2004 09:37:11 PM · #3

woohoo. Monster focal length! Can't wait to see sample pics.

I'll be looking at the Sigma 50-500mm eventually, maybe the Canon 100-400.

Message edited by author 2004-02-11 21:40:13.

Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM

02/11/2004 09:42:36 PM · #4

sorry had to find tape measure-- 13inches(when extended), 86mm diameter filter!
(last month I missed some eagles shots, cuz just out of range not this month : ))

jacko do you have the 300mm? I was convinced to buy the 500mm over the 400mm because only 50$ difference and not a specialty lens

Message edited by author 2004-02-11 21:44:33.

justine

Canon EOS-50D

02/11/2004 09:46:45 PM · #5

Looks big.
You'll shoot the fleas on the head of a hummingbird!!
Sounds awesome. Sample shots?

EddyG

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/11/2004 09:50:51 PM · #6

Let us know if the autofocus continues to work reliably once you are forced past f/5.6 as your maximum aperture as you increase your focal length. (Canon's consumer and prosumer bodies are supposed to only autofocus with lenses that are f/5.6 or brighter.)

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM

02/11/2004 09:51:40 PM · #7

sorry no sample shots yet, just got it and its dark, hopefully tommorrow : ), yes well I am interested in shooting fleas-lol, although there will never be a challenge topic on them : )

thx eddy for tip, i noticed i can only go to 5.0, so you may be on to something, I will try and remember to check it tommorrow

Message edited by author 2004-02-11 21:53:05.

hsteg

Fujifilm X-T20

02/11/2004 09:52:26 PM · #8

do you have another camera to take a pic of the lens on the rebel?

zeuszen

Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

02/11/2004 09:57:59 PM · #9

I mount the subject on a tripod, duct-tape five magnifying glasses to the quick-release, stalk the tripod and when I see sort of a circle in the viewfinder, press the shutter button. After several passes of full sharpening, anybody looks like Everest on a clear day.

With the advanced editing rules in place now, I can do panoramas in macro. Who needs a big lens?

Message edited by author 2004-02-11 21:58:22.

02/11/2004 10:01:45 PM · #10

you can find a pic on here, this is b4 extended,
null sigma lens

hmm that does not look right, but it is link

Message edited by author 2004-02-11 22:04:30.

02/11/2004 10:17:45 PM · #11

Yeah, the 170-500 is pretty soft, but for the money you really can't beat the reach. It's so damned slow on the long end (but I don't usually need it terribly fast most of the time) and the AF is absolutely brutal. I'm not sure how it'll perform on the 300D (the D60's AF is different), but I've found that it hunts quite a bit. In other words, it's not the best lens for tracking birds in flight, not that it's stopped me from trying (with varying degress of success (or mostly failure)).

I haven't had any AF issues above f/5.6. I can't be bothered to mount the lens right now, but I can see that most of my 500mm shots are at f/5.6. Strange.

02/11/2004 10:22:03 PM · #12

dwool- do you find it is so soft you wish you had not gotten it?

pitsaman

Canon EOS-30D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

02/11/2004 11:07:47 PM · #13

Anybody have Tamron 200-400 F5.6,Any photo samples?

02/12/2004 01:09:49 AM · #14

Originally posted by ellamay:

dwool- do you find it is so soft you wish you had not gotten it?

Definitely not, but the 50-500 wasn't around when I got the 170-500. Right now the 50-500 looks like a much better value than the 170-500: better optics, more range, hsm. The extra convenience of not having to change lenses just to get down to the 50-80 range seems worth it. I've made 20x30 prints (from film, so that's 13x19 equivalent for the 1.6 sensor) and the softest thing about it is the grain (400 nph).

Anyway, I wouldn't worry about how soft I find it at times. You'll see the results soon enough.

FYI, when shooting with it, I use it 80% at one end or the other, so I've learned that what I really want is a fixed lens (e.g. 300/400/500 plus TCs).

EddyG

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

02/12/2004 08:37:21 AM · #15

Originally posted by dwoolridge:

I haven't had any AF issues above f/5.6. I can't be bothered to mount the lens right now, but I can see that most of my 500mm shots are at f/5.6. Strange.

That is why I was wondering if the lens was trying to "fake out" the camera and report an aperture of f/5.6 so the body would still TRY to AF, since I think if the maximum aperture reported by the lens is more than 5.6, the AF may just not work AT ALL, whereas if the lens "lies" to the camera, the AF can be forced to try and work. Although from what I've heard it is pretty unreliable, which is why I was curious how it worked on the 300D. (Obviously if you are at 500mm your aperture will be f/6.3, regardless of what the camera says, right?)

IMHO, the best lens in this zoom range is Canon's 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS USM. Not only do you an excellent zoom range, but you stick within the AF boundaries of the prosumer bodies even at full zoom, you get Image Stabilization so you can reliably hand-hold more shots, and you get fast focusing courtesy of USM. And it is only very slightly heavier than the Sigma 170-500 (and quite a bit lighter than the Sigma 50-500!)

Also, a reminder to review the Lens Performance Survey before purchasing so you are at least aware of how other photographers rate the lens...

Message edited by author 2004-02-12 08:43:52.

tfaust

Canon EOS 80D

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

02/12/2004 08:54:20 AM · #16

Canon's 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS USM is on my list! I rented the Canon 400mm f/5.6L USM and was so impressed with it. I loved using it and had a really hard time going back to my 75-300mm. The images it produced were awesome and I even used it handheld all day.

Flash

Nikon D700

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D IF-ED

02/12/2004 09:33:04 AM · #17

Originally posted by ellamay:

Do you find it hard to switch tripod from cam to lens?

One of the reasons that I use quick release plates is for the convienience of changing from a camera mount to a lense mount. With a 28-70 or single focal 50 attached to the body, the QR plate is attached to the camera. For the 75-300 or single focal 500 the QR plates are attached to the lense collar. When switching lenses, the QR plates are attached to the various pieces making the process, fluid and fast.

Further....both my mono and tri accept the same plate system, so I have multiple options. Additional plates are available from the manufacturers.

Message edited by author 2004-02-12 09:45:07.

02/12/2004 10:44:33 AM · #18

Originally posted by EddyG:

Although from what I've heard it is pretty unreliable, which is why I was curious how it worked on the 300D. (Obviously if you are at 500mm your aperture will be f/6.3, regardless of what the camera says, right?)

Yeah, I'd say the AF is more unreliable on the D60 than on my Elan, but (AFAIK) they use different AF systems and my memory ain't what it used to be. I don't recall if the Elan ever reported an aperture larger than f/6.3 @500mm. Most Sigma lenses are slow focusing anyway.

Originally posted by EddyG:

IMHO, the best lens in this zoom range is Canon's 100-400/4.5-5.6L IS USM. Not only do you an excellent zoom range, but you stick within the AF boundaries of the prosumer bodies even at full zoom, you get Image Stabilization so you can reliably hand-hold more shots, and you get fast focusing courtesy of USM. And it is only very slightly heavier than the Sigma 170-500 (and quite a bit lighter than the Sigma 50-500!)

It's all about value vs. cost eh?

As far as IS goes, it would be nice to have, but I've hand held the 170-500 at 500mm (on a moving boat no less). IS will probably give you good shots every time, but I work around it (when shooting digital) by shooting a 5-plus shot sequence. One of them usually comes out sharp (enough). Until the lens makes money for me, I'm not going to spend money on it! ;-)

Originally posted by EddyG:

Also, a reminder to review the Lens Performance Survey before purchasing so you are at least aware of how other photographers rate the lens...

You know there's an interface to that on photozone right? It doesn't display the raw numbers; it uses a 5-star system with half star deltas instead (using the same data).

02/12/2004 11:19:58 AM · #19

thanks for all the info, I never hand hold shots anymore unless I can angle my tripod to do a shot, so I am not too worried about getting hand held shots. And I agree with flash, getting a second plate is a great idea. I can't wait to take it out today. I guess I will have to wait and see what I think , anyone know how much the 50-500 costs? Should I exchange them? hmmm

02/12/2004 12:27:08 PM · #20

Originally posted by ellamay:

I guess I will have to wait and see what I think , anyone know how much the 50-500 costs? Should I exchange them? hmmm

For a given store, the 50-500 is usually 50% more than the 170-500, on average.

Message edited by author 2004-02-12 12:27:20.

EddyG