Going Bigger ?

C

cheech

Messages
108
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi All,

I'm thinking of getting a bigger lens than my current 70-300 IS. F4-5.6.
I've been looking at a Sigma 150-500 OS. Has anybody any experience with this lens or can offer an alternative without breaking the bank further ?

Or would a 2x extender be worth considering ?

I use it for wild life and sports mainly.

Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
 
I've never used a bigger lens, so cant really help here.
However by adding a 2X teleconverter will make your lens f8-f11 which may be to slow for some sports and you will probably loose autofocus.
 
I use a Sigma 150-500. Not a perfect lens for anything moving (unless your body has extremely good high ISO performance) since the small maximum aperture means that shutter speeds will be relatively slow and that movement will be hard to freeze. The lens isn't light, either! while it can be used hand held, you'll feel it after not very long.

The only alternative I can think of is the Canon 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 IS L but at a grand or so (2nd hand, Mifsuds price), it ain't cheap and is 100mm shorter. Depending on your body, a 1.4x extender might be an option with this lens - maybe a Cononeer can shed more light?
 
Theres the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8.. not cheap at about 1800. but with a 2x teleconverter your still shooting at a reasonable f-stop. IQ will be significantly better than the 50-500mm
 
I have the BigmOS (Sigma 150-500, f5-6.3) which is about the same weight and size as the Sigma 50-500 but with Optical Stabilisation. For the money, it takes some beating but it is difficult initially getting used to the weight and slightly slow focussing. I use it for motorsport, wildlife and moonshots, but would recommend you use a monopod with a manfrotto 234RC head or similar rather than a ball head.

YB

re message#4 above, go on the Sigma 150-500 thread on Flickr and see the number of fast moving subjects photographed with this lens, I have piccies of the Red Arrows flying at close quarters as one of the first outings with my 150-500 and it kept up with them!
 
The 100-400L is a cracking lens...
 
Yellabelly said:
re message#4 above, go on the Sigma 150-500 thread on Flickr and see the number of fast moving subjects photographed with this lens, I have piccies of the Red Arrows flying at close quarters as one of the first outings with my 150-500 and it kept up with them!
Click to expand...

I have some pics of the Red Arrows taken with the 150-500 and, as you said, it kept up with them fairly well. Where it lost out to the 70-300 VR on a Dx body was in picking the planes out from a cluttered background (I was shooting down on the planes with a beach and town in the background).

By the movement, I was referring more to birds flapping their wings or moving their heads quickly - with lower ISOs and their attendant slower shutter speeds, subject movement is a real problem. Thank any available deities for the D700!

For moonshots, I use it handheld. ISO 400 gives a rule of thumb 1/800th shutter speed at f/8 which is fast enough to use it even without the OS turned on.
 
I have the Sigma 150-500 OS HSM lens and it's my prime birding lens mainly due to the need to have reach. As others have said it is heavy, just shy of 2kg and I tend to use it 90% of the time on a tripod. The f6.3 is a bit limiting in poor light for wildlife, but I have only really found this a problem when struggling to fill the frame with the subject. The HSM is fast enough and the OS is very good. I think for the money it is very good value for those on a budget.

The example below is handheld with OS enabled, and in good light:

 
Thanks everybody, still not sure which way to go.
I could always try the canon 2x extender and if no good I don't think I would loose much money or are they not that much in demand ?
 
cheech said:
Thanks everybody, still not sure which way to go.
I could always try the canon 2x extender and if no good I don't think I would loose much money or are they not that much in demand ?
Click to expand...

I don't think a 2x converter on this lens will be very good - You'll struggle to get the required shutter speeds for sharp images , the lens would only have a fastest aperture of f8 at 140mm, and if its going on a Canon you'll lose autofocus.
 
I've been pondering a similar dilemma. I have a 70-200L f4 & have enjoyed the quick focus & sharp images, but ideally I need more reach.

As most people, I have considered the 100-400L, but it's not exactly fast at f5.6. Am I right in thinking that OS would overcome the 150-500 OS slightly smaller aperture.

Sigma claim 4 stops for the OS system & I have seen some nice sharp example shots, it's very tempting at less £ than a 2nd hand 100-400.

I have discounted teleconvertors, Cheech, as they aren't ideal on zooms & your lens gets softer & slower!

I'll be interested to see how you get on with whichever you choose.
 
Being realistic, I think you have to consider the Sigma which gives you 500mm which is a good length (ooer missus!)

Going OEM it's either the 100-400L or the 400mm f5.6 prime, with the latter being a tad sharper.

Beyond that there be goblins and dragons and it gets mega pricey.
 
The Canon extender will not even fit your lens. You could use the Kenko extender BUT you will lose autofocus and image quality will be much worse and will need bright sunlight to take any photo with a meaningful shutter speed.

The 150-500 is a very nice lens as is the 120-400. Rent one and give it a go :)
 
Nice picture Jerry, how is it when they are in a tree / less exposed area?
I think it will be the siggy when I can afford it, but for now I think I will have to practise my stalking !

Thanks everyone
 
CT said:
Being realistic, I think you have to consider the Sigma which gives you 500mm which is a good length (ooer missus!)
Click to expand...

I believe the 50-500mm (not sure about the 150-500mm) overstates its length a bit. It's closer to 450mm apparently.

I'm currently debating in this area too, but I'm in no rush so I'll probably grab whichever I see at a good price first...it's a real swings and roundabouts debate. Canon 100-400 is probably the best IQ, 50-500mm has the most range (which could come in handy) and 150-500mm is the cheapest.
 
cheech said:
Nice picture Jerry, how is it when they are in a tree / less exposed area?
I think it will be the siggy when I can afford it, but for now I think I will have to practise my stalking !

Thanks everyone
Click to expand...

Subjects in trees/reeds etc I have found the AF to be accurate and fast.

If you are doing birding on a budget then I would strongly suggest Sigma 150-500 OS HSM or Canon equivalents suggested by other posters (100-400)
 
Comfortably Numb said:
Am I right in thinking that OS would overcome the 150-500 OS slightly smaller aperture.
Click to expand...


Sort of!

The OS will allow a few stops worth of hand holdability but cannot get you the higher shutter speeds that a wider aperture can give. Or the extra shallow DoF that wide apertures have.
 
Nod said:
Sort of!

The OS will allow a few stops worth of hand holdability but cannot get you the higher shutter speeds that a wider aperture can give. Or the extra shallow DoF that wide apertures have.
Click to expand...

Nod, I agree but it's horses for courses, the Sig costs what ..£650!

Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6L £1268
400 f2.8L £6659
400 f4L £5547
500 f4L £5569

a bit steep methinks to gain the higher speed!;)

YB
 
Very much so BUT, if you NEED the extra shutter speed, you NEED the wider apertures. All OS/IS/VR etc can do is reduce cmaera shake.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top