Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
PhotoKB Home
Discussion Groups
Digital Photography
Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot Cameras
Film Photography
35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther Equipment
Photo Technique
Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique General
General Photo Topics
General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK Photography
DirectoryPhoto Clubs

Photo Forum / Digital Photography / DSLR Cameras / February 2007

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Sigma 170-500mm

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Bruce - 29 Jan 2007 00:55 GMT
I am considering buying this lens for bird photos, has any one had
experience of this lens.

Bruce
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) - 31 Jan 2007 14:45 GMT
> I am considering buying this lens for bird photos, has any one had
> experience of this lens.
>
> Bruce

A Lens test Canon EOS 100-400mm L IS vs Sigma 170-500mm vs Canon 75-300mm IS
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/lenstest1.html

But I have retired all of these lenses for fixed focal length lenses.
For starting wildlife photography I recommend a 300 mm f/4 lens
(if Canon, 300 f/4 L IS).  With a 1.4x TC added I find it records
more detail than either the the Canon 100-400 or the Sigma 170-500
or canon 75-300.

This is an example with the 300 f/3 + 1.4x Kenko pro 300 TC:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird/web/lorikeet.c04.07.2005.JZ3F8
962.b-700.html


Of course, if you can afford a 500 mm f/4 L IS, plus carbon fiber tripod
and Wimberly head, it is a spectacular setup (with its spectacular price).
Examples:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.bird

(I just returned from Africa where I took the 500 and 300 f/4 lenses,
gallery coming soon after I sift through some 8,000 images)

Roger
Bart van der Wolf - 01 Feb 2007 12:49 GMT
SNIP
> (I just returned from Africa where I took the 500 and 300 f/4
> lenses, gallery coming soon after I sift through some 8,000 images)

Which did you find more useful for your type of shots, the 300 or
500mm?
Did you happen to try any 300mm "stitches" (or did you worry about
running out of storage for the day)?

Bart
Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) - 01 Feb 2007 14:12 GMT
> SNIP
>> (I just returned from Africa where I took the 500 and 300 f/4 lenses,
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Bart

Hi Bart,

Three of us had 500 mm f/4 lenses and 1d Mark IIs.  Another had
a 300 mm f/4 and 20D.  We usually used the lenses with 1.4x TCs
or 2x TCs (on the 1D bodies).  The 300 on the 1.6 crop 20D
is about equivalent to 370 mm on a 1D (1.3x crop) in terms
of field of view.  There were times when I had the 500 +1.4 or
2x when I wished I had on the 300.  Usually there was no time
to change lenses so I just did mosaics.  Here is my first
mosaic: 2 frames on a cheetah, assembled in ptgui:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.africa/web/cheetah.c01.19.2007.JZ3F
8148-9f-800.html

Of course that only works on still animals.
Everyone got great photos, regardless of focal length.
The bigger lenses helped more for birds.  You'll see as we
post images that we got real close to many large animals.
One day a lion walked past the jeep and the 20D +300 mm recorded
a closeup of just the lion's eyes, but I got nothing as my
500 mm would not focus that close (I did get the lion further out
of course).

I have many mosaics to construct, big animals, birds, and scenics.
It'll take me years ;-).

No one had any issues with not enough memory cards.  I carried
about 74 GBytes of CF cards and did not have to reformat any,
so I returned with 3 copies of all images and 4 copies of most
(I had to delete some from my laptop drive as I ran out of space
on it, but I had 2 usb drives for backup).

I had to clean my sensor once on the 1DII and not at all on the
10D (on which I usually used a 70-200 f/4 IS).  That after 2-weeks
in dusty conditions.

Let me know how the colors and contrast look on the above image.
This is my first processing on a new computer with an LCD,
which is calibrated with a spyder 2, but I'm not completely satisfied
yet (previously I used a sony crt).

Roger
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.