| Author | Thread |
|
|
06/11/2008 08:56:09 AM · #1 |
| I'm looking to add some more reach to my equipment and have somewhat been perusing my options. I would prefer to get a focal length of 400 or above, and not totally break the bank in doing so. I'm not terribly concerned about the max aperture being a bit high, as most of the situations I would be using it in are very bright (almost always very sunny here) and I would be shooting from a tripod likely as well. Principally, I would be using this lens for wildlife that I can't get close enough to as is (I'm very patient and don't mind moving slowly, but there's a certain point where it just doesn't matter how sneaky you are anymore). I've read stellar reviews as well as major complaints for the Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3, but most of the problems (weight, weight, and only f4-6.3). I've seen reports of great as well as terrible sharpness at the higher end of the focal range, and although there are folks here that own the lens, the photos I have seen seem a bit soft (this could be due to crop or lack of a tripod or any number of things though). I know there are inherent compromises with the 10x range of the "Bigma," but I think I can accept those in consideration of the 500mm reach and having a lens that would presumably work from the 200-500mm range. I was also looking somewhat at the Sigma 135-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG APO and the Tokina 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 AT-X Pro D. Information for the Tokina is very slim and their website looks like a joke, but I have heard some decent reviews on their products, and wanted to hear from some other folks. Also, I am by no means stuck on these choices, but would like to keep things under 1K for the time being, moving up to a Nikon later. Any input on the matter would be great. |
|
|
|
06/11/2008 09:10:28 AM · #2 |
I like the Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6D ED VR. Not the fastest lens, but it has VR, is comparatively light, and image sharpness is pretty good. It may be slightly out of your price range brand new (starting at $1289), but might be acquired used for less than 1,000. The only example image in my portfolio right now is below.
[thumb]328567[/thumb] |
|
|
|
06/11/2008 09:14:25 AM · #3 |
| I had the Sigma 80-400 OS (optically stabilized) for my canon. that was a very nice lens. was very sharp. the only downside for me was the f5.6 max at the long end. don't know the current prices, but when I got mine, it was less than $1000. |
|
|
|
06/11/2008 09:21:13 AM · #4 |
What about a Reflex Lens.
Here's a photo.net write-up and some other site |
|
|
|
06/11/2008 09:37:13 AM · #5 |
| Go to Adorama's used section. They have a Sigma 170-500 for $499. And many, many others in your price range. |
|
|
|
06/12/2008 03:48:10 AM · #6 |
| I had started my search in the Adorama used section, as I've always had great service from them, but somehow managed to miss that Sigma 170-500. Have you heard anything regarding it's quality? The reviews I found didn't have anything too great to say about it. The reflex idea is a possible...although I prefer to shoot in A-Priority, so adjusting to that would change my approach significantly, but that isn't always bad. The Nikkor 80-400 was one that I had perused as well, but I'm not sure that I want to exceed my budget to get it, considering that to get additional range I would have to add a TC which adds even more cost and slows it down as well. Hmmm. |
|
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: 12/27/2025 10:14:59 PM EST.
