Posted by David Buck on November 3, 2007 at 7:01 PM
Does anyone have a opinion on the Sigma 50-500 4.5-6.3 HSM lens? Currently I am using a Canon 300 f/4 L IS with a Canon 1.4x convertor. I am pleased with the quality of the Canon but need to get closer and the 300 is too short. The quality with the 1.4x is alright. Would it be worth to get the Sigma instead for the extra focal length? If I could afford a 500 or 600 f/4 I wouldn't be posting this topic. I love the IS on the 300, I can handhold it down to 1/40 sec with outstanding results, I'm not sure if I want to give that up. Please post your opinions.
Thanks,
David
Posted by Basil Greber on November 3, 2007 at 7:12 PM
No idea, honestly. General consensus seems to be that it's as good as it gets for the price & focal length combination. But make sure you compare it to the Tamron 200-500 SP - which has a good reputation, too.
Stick with what you have. I have the 50-500, and I'm happy with it. However, I would not be able to get sharp results at 1/40th handheld.
I use the long end of the lens exclusively. My best results are usually at about 450 though. For some reason 500 never seems as sharp as I'd hope for. So if the copy you'd end up with is anything like mine, you wouldn't really gain any reach vs. 300 w/ 1.4tc.
I had the Sigma 50-500 for a good while, and liked it. I also found that 450 was about the max for a sharp image. So, I'd also stick with what you have - the 300 + 1.4
Save up for a lens that will really be an improvement.
My thoughts!
I think you could stick with what you have if you're pleased with the results, but you could compare it with the Sigma 170-500. I own that lens and I am very pleased with it. I can do almost everything handheld without any special effort. It has a lot less weight than the Sigma 50-500.
Sure, the Sigma 50-500 has weight, but I have found that the results is worth the weight. Guess it may depend on the camera it is attached to but attached to the Sony A100, I get excellent results at 50 or 500. Even tho I can't use it with out a good tripod ( I didn't expect to when I purchased it) it is well worth the money and the little can't do's. It is now my most favorite lens.I might add that teleconverters 1X or 2X can be used with this lens for a great more distance.I would also like to add that when in the field many times I have used the 50mm setting for close up photography such as butterflies with excellent results, on a tripod of course. It is an all around lense for me.
Posted by Basil Greber on November 4, 2007 at 4:38 PM
I doubt that a 2x TC on a 500 f/6.3 makes much sense (you're at 1000 f/13 at this point - dark viewfinder, no AF, lots of camera shake). Just MHO.
Basil
Posted by David Buck on November 9, 2007 at 9:09 PM
Thanks for the info.
Posted by Piotr Pyziolek on November 11, 2007 at 2:22 AM
I use this lens for more or less four years for the purpose of landscapes photography. It is really heavy. Taking pictures without the tripod is almost impossible. The quality of the slides for me is truly acceptable. Still you must remember that this lens likes to vignette, so the usable apperture at the 400-500 mm with the focus set to the infinity is definately not 6.3...
The examples of the pictures you can see here:
http://www.dreamygallery.com/misty.html
http://www.dreamygallery.com/kpn.html
and the photo with TCx2 by Tamron is available here:
I have owned this lense for about six months, and have been very pleased with it. It focuses very fast and quiet, and is sharp clean out to 500, on my camera, which is a Olympus E-510. I do not use a tripod, instead I use a monopod with a ball head and a shoulder brace. I get pretty good results, and use this lense primarily for bird photography. Hope this helps. Would I buy one again? Yes!
Posted by Arnab Banerjee on November 30, 2007 at 1:03 PM
All Sigma lenses are not really well built and is not really comparable to prime lenses. But they are good value for money. Just dont have high expectation and a lot of people make great images by them - having 500 mm is definitely a huge advantage if you shoot birds. If you were a Nikon user, I would have recommended 80-400 VR which is much better than any Sigma or Tamron. Not sure Canon has a equivalent
There are few lens that are sharp at 500mm without a tripod, discounting those with VR. Camera shake, either from outside forces such as wind or the action of pressing the shutter button, or from the camera itself from mirror slap, are the primary sharpness thieves. At shutter speeds between 1/30 and 1/125 you are likely to see more of this effect than at other speeds. The solution is to get the stiffest tripod and strongest head you can carry.
While mass has its advantages, the material the tripod is made from is probably more important in damping vibrations. Carbon fiber, especially the newer lighter weaves, is exceptionally good at damping vibrations. I recently purchased a Sigma 50-500 and using an old Bogen studio tripod that weighed in at over 15 lbs, I was disappointed with the results in the critical shutter speed range. I knew it was not the lens because at speeds of 1/1000 or higher the images were acceptably sharp.
So off to ebay went the Bogen, and I ordered a 3 series Gitzo with an Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead, which is sufficient for up to a 400mm lens. The next jump in stiffness, the 5 series would have doubled the weight I'd have to carry, so I compromised a bit. As it turns out, it was not a mistake, and the percentage of "keepers" has increased significantly.
Not enough is said about long lens technique. Whenever possible it is a good idea to use a cable or wireless shutter release. If possible, mirror lock up will eliminate all camera-borne vibration. Suspending additional weight from the tripod helps. Placing a beanbag on top of the lens or draping your free arm over the lens is almost mandatory at focal lengths of 500 or over. Shutter delay, a feature found on Nikon cameras, will delay the actual exposure for a fraction of a second after the shutter press initiates it, allowing the camera/lens/tripod to settle down after the mirror stops moving.
A gimbal head is essential if you want to shoot moving (or flying) subjects. I have had good results with a Manfrotto 3421 which can be purchased for under $200 these days.
While not recommended, there are times when you need to use a 1.4x or 2x extender. Yes, they do diminish sharpness, especially at the edges. No, the results are not unacceptable. If the other alternative is shooting at 500 and cropping and upsizing in photoshop, the extender is a preferable alternative, unless you are using a full-frame DSLR. In the field, most of the time the subject of a telephoto shot is in or near the center where the image is sharpest anyway. It is important to note that using a Sigma 5-500 with a 2x extender for a 1000 mm focal length on the 3 series Gitzo can yield some useable images as you can see below.
The benefit of VR on such long focal lengths is primarily for non-moving subjects, shot hand-held. Tracking a moving subject will tend to confuse the VR mechanism, which will attempt to correct for any movement.
The lens is the least expensive option that can provide consistent quality results without having to take out a second mortgage. Even after you spend another $1000 on the support system, its still a fraction of the cost of prime 500 mm lens.
Discussion
11 repliesThanks,
David
Basil
I use the long end of the lens exclusively. My best results are usually at about 450 though. For some reason 500 never seems as sharp as I'd hope for. So if the copy you'd end up with is anything like mine, you wouldn't really gain any reach vs. 300 w/ 1.4tc.
Hope this helps.
-Dylan
Save up for a lens that will really be an improvement.
My thoughts!
Sandy r
Betty-Lou Luyken
Basil
The examples of the pictures you can see here:
http://www.dreamygallery.com/misty.html
http://www.dreamygallery.com/kpn.html
and the photo with TCx2 by Tamron is available here:
http://www.dreamygallery.com/single252.html
Regards,
Pyzik
http://www.dreamygallery.com
While mass has its advantages, the material the tripod is made from is probably more important in damping vibrations. Carbon fiber, especially the newer lighter weaves, is exceptionally good at damping vibrations. I recently purchased a Sigma 50-500 and using an old Bogen studio tripod that weighed in at over 15 lbs, I was disappointed with the results in the critical shutter speed range. I knew it was not the lens because at speeds of 1/1000 or higher the images were acceptably sharp.
So off to ebay went the Bogen, and I ordered a 3 series Gitzo with an Arca-Swiss Z1 ballhead, which is sufficient for up to a 400mm lens. The next jump in stiffness, the 5 series would have doubled the weight I'd have to carry, so I compromised a bit. As it turns out, it was not a mistake, and the percentage of "keepers" has increased significantly.
Not enough is said about long lens technique. Whenever possible it is a good idea to use a cable or wireless shutter release. If possible, mirror lock up will eliminate all camera-borne vibration. Suspending additional weight from the tripod helps. Placing a beanbag on top of the lens or draping your free arm over the lens is almost mandatory at focal lengths of 500 or over. Shutter delay, a feature found on Nikon cameras, will delay the actual exposure for a fraction of a second after the shutter press initiates it, allowing the camera/lens/tripod to settle down after the mirror stops moving.
A gimbal head is essential if you want to shoot moving (or flying) subjects. I have had good results with a Manfrotto 3421 which can be purchased for under $200 these days.
While not recommended, there are times when you need to use a 1.4x or 2x extender. Yes, they do diminish sharpness, especially at the edges. No, the results are not unacceptable. If the other alternative is shooting at 500 and cropping and upsizing in photoshop, the extender is a preferable alternative, unless you are using a full-frame DSLR. In the field, most of the time the subject of a telephoto shot is in or near the center where the image is sharpest anyway. It is important to note that using a Sigma 5-500 with a 2x extender for a 1000 mm focal length on the 3 series Gitzo can yield some useable images as you can see below.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9961692@N04/2336543494/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9961692@N04/2336543494/sizes/o/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/9961692@N04/2470826692/sizes/o/in/photostream/
Manual focus and ISO 800 or higher are required.
The benefit of VR on such long focal lengths is primarily for non-moving subjects, shot hand-held. Tracking a moving subject will tend to confuse the VR mechanism, which will attempt to correct for any movement.
The lens is the least expensive option that can provide consistent quality results without having to take out a second mortgage. Even after you spend another $1000 on the support system, its still a fraction of the cost of prime 500 mm lens.