Kingfisher (Sigma 150-600mm `C` with Converter)

Good at 1/40th ... would you have gone above ISO 800 to go faster?
 
I have had 2 Sigma 1.4 tele converters for Nikon fit and both fell apart, so from my experience I think they are very poor build quality. The first I returned to supplier and the second I just scrapped as it became so loose inside. maybe others have found them ok but i would not have one as a gift now.
Maybe the 1401 has improved over the earlier versions I had, but I would not risk getting another

have to agree with the others and a superb photo at that range of 840mm
 
Last edited:
The TC1401 was specially designed for the new lenses though wasn't it?
 
michael23 said:
very impressive, what focal length was it at?
Click to expand...

section of exif data


ExposureTime: 1/40"
Aperture: F9.0
MaxAperture: F8.7
CircleOfConfusion: 0.009 mm
HyperfocalDistance: 8823.03 m
ExposureProgram: Manual
ExposureBiasValue: 0
MeteringMode: Center-weighted average
Flash: Off, Did not fire
ISO: 800
WhiteBalance: Manual
FocalLength: 840.0 mm
FocalLength35efl: 840.0 mm (35 mm equivalent: 2840.3 mm)


You can download exif data here
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Multimedia/Graphic/Digital-Photo-Tools/KUSO-Exif-Viewer.shtml

right click on photo and you get this dropdown list were you will find kuso exif viewer


 
Last edited:
Cheers all.
I could have gone to a higher iso but as it was on a tripod and I had it pre-focussed on the perch there was no need.
The build quality does seem very solid but not had a Sigma Converter before so cant really judge whether this is better or not.
 
Mike
i can only speak asI find , obviously. i think one has to be careful as to what the weight difference is on the connection via TC between heavy lens and camera. Even though when using a heavy lens and supported on the lens collar mine came loose. The nikon D800 I use comes in at a weight of just over 3lb with a grip and the Nikon AFs 80-400mm is 3.1 lb

The ends might be strong enough not to move, but my guess is what is inside the Sigma TC I had was week. I did partly strip down the second failed one and was quite shocked at how poorly the inside was made to stop comming apart. Tiny miniture screws and a couple of bits of plastic is all I could observe, definately not to withstand this kind of weight no matter if supports on the camera or lens collar.

If I used one again i would seriously thing about some kind of bracket support to fit onto lens and camera. This would take the weight strain off the TC
 
Last edited:
realspeed said:
Mike
i can only speak asI find , obviously. i think one has to be careful as to what the weight difference is on the connection via TC between heavy lens and camera. Even though when using a heavy lens and supported on the lens collar mine came loose. The nikon D800 I use comes in at a weight of just over 3lb with a grip and the Nikon AFs 80-400mm is 3.1 lb

The ends might be strong enough not to move, but my guess is what is inside the Sigma TC I had was week. I did partly strip down the second failed one and was quite shocked at how poorly the inside was made to stop comming apart. Tiny miniture screws and a couple of bits of plastic is all I could observe, definately not to withstand this kind of weight no matter if supports on the camera or lens collar.
Click to expand...
I agree and even with just the lens attached I only put the weight `on the lens` and never carry it via the camera body. The 70d is basically plastic (unlike my old metal 50d) which is the only thing I dont like about it.
 
Mike
your canon 70d come in at 1.7 lbs so almost have the weight on mine so you may not come across the same problem but something I never gave a thought to before. I can't find any reference to Sigma TC load allowed , someting i think sould be made known in their description
The nikon d800 has the ability to go into crop mode adding 1.5x to the mm length so doing away with the need for a TC
That with the 36.3MP sensor allows considerable futher cropping without lose of picture quality

Forgot to say earlier I have never even had the chance to photograph let alone see a kingfisher, so I do envy you
 
Last edited:
Handsome fellow, Mike, the bird that is! :D But to have a meaningful conversation about sharpness you should consider posting crop examples at 100%, with a before and after pp-ing. At this size, it can be difficult to tell sometimes.
 
Thanks again all.

dragonfly said:
Handsome fellow, Mike, the bird that is! :D But to have a meaningful conversation about sharpness you should consider posting crop examples at 100%, with a before and after pp-ing. At this size, it can be difficult to tell sometimes.
Click to expand...

It was never meant to be a thorough test Des (will leave those things to the experts) but merely an image I was pleased with considering the conditions and using relatively cheap equipment.
 
Yes, it's amazing how good the tele-zooms are these days. Wasn't meant to be a crit, Mike, but I do question why many would comment on sharpness/quality when the image has been shrunk so substantially for web view! None of these should take away from what is a very lovely image.
 
You've got a great image here Mike, the lens / extender has worked very well. Stunning bird and a very good image at the range taken. I think this proves that the Siggy lens is very capable in the right hands!
 
Nice one Mike, have the lens and 70d as of yet not tried with a converter, I have Canon 1.4 mk2 might just give it a whirl
 
Mike fabulous shot ,i also love the BG. i have a mate on the web who uses this lens i think,takes some superb shots ,so i'm not surprised so much by your results it's still very cool and i' m also blown away by your shutter speed,tripod or now they are fast little guys,but no perceived motion blur from subject to me,cor what a corker of a shot.

It's really cool what sigma and tamaron etc are doing: 600mm lenses by our camera main brands are serious money,plausibly out of reach for many of us,or at least taking years to aquire. It's so cool that a potential shot at what was it 840mm that looks like this(even at web size) is now becoming available to more togs. Good for you mate and siggy.

Blummin 'eck wildlife togging it's 4: 30am and we are just off to chase a fawn that I could probably just walk up to at a local estate where the deer know folks,but I wanna wild one lmao must be bloody mad!!

take care Mike nice one!!

Stu
 
Stuart Philpott said:
Mike fabulous shot ,i also love the BG. i have a mate on the web who uses this lens i think,takes some superb shots ,so i'm not surprised so much by your results it's still very cool and i' m also blown away by your shutter speed,tripod or now they are fast little guys,but no perceived motion blur from subject to me,cor what a corker of a shot.

It's really cool what sigma and tamaron etc are doing: 600mm lenses by our camera main brands are serious money,plausibly out of reach for many of us,or at least taking years to aquire. It's so cool that a potential shot at what was it 840mm that looks like this(even at web size) is now becoming available to more togs. Good for you mate and siggy.

Blummin 'eck wildlife togging it's 4: 30am and we are just off to chase a fawn that I could probably just walk up to at a local estate where the deer know folks,but I wanna wild one lmao must be bloody mad!!

take care Mike nice one!!

Stu
Click to expand...
And it doesnt get easier as you get older either Stu lol.
I agree though that its a great thing that Tamron and Sigma have gone down this route. Also a good thing that they are in direct competition bringing the prices down to £750 :)
I know they would never match the quality of a Canon 600mm f4 but at several thousand pound I could never justify spending that plus the fact its so cumbersome. I could carry the Sigma all day long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top