New Sigma 60-600 sport coming.

40 is an unusual choice given they already do a 35 and a 50 1.4 which are already close enough in terms of fl.
 
thats 2.7 kilos without a camera attached mike so no lighter at all ,they are good lenses but what a weight penalty I now realise why my sub 1.5 kilo camera and lens rig with the same effective reach or a bit longer is the way forward
 
the black fox said:
thats 2.7 kilos without a camera attached mike so no lighter at all ,they are good lenses but what a weight penalty I now realise why my sub 1.5 kilo camera and lens rig with the same effective reach or a bit longer is the way forward
Click to expand...

I realise there is no weight saving to talk of but the 60-150mm would be very handy if you are getting the same performance at 600mm. I have a Sigma 50-500mm for my FF Pentax and use the 50mm quite a bit.
 
Is this a good thing? Even if you accept this huge weight I always shuidder as to what compromies are created in a zoom lens when its FL range is greater than x5. 10x has to incur a big trade-off.
 
chuckles said:
Is this a good thing? Even if you accept this huge weight I always shuidder as to what compromies are created in a zoom lens when its FL range is greater than x5. 10x has to incur a big trade-off.
Click to expand...
out of interest why x5? is there a mathematical or physical reson for saying this mag factor?
 
niko said:
out of interest why x5? is there a mathematical or physical reson for saying this mag factor?
Click to expand...

Nothing other than, in my experience, all the zooms I've tried above 5x have had issues; usually getting 'soft' at the long end. 5x seemd to be the cut-off point.
 
chuckles said:
Is this a good thing? Even if you accept this huge weight I always shuidder as to what compromies are created in a zoom lens when its FL range is greater than x5. 10x has to incur a big trade-off.
Click to expand...
I agree. The Nikon 24-120 is a compromise lens. It has to be to cover such a range. That pales into comparison to a 10 x zoom.
 
niko said:
out of interest why x5? is there a mathematical or physical reson for saying this mag factor?
Click to expand...

There are cine lenses with 10X or greater zoom range and excellent IQ throughout. Except the price is a real bombshell. So the tradeoff is actually building it to a budget. Well the end result is the same.
 
I don't know if things have changed in the last couple of years with the wider use of in camera optimisation, but the accepted zoom ratios for fast zooms of high optical quality, without such electronic fiddling, used to be 2:1 for wide angle, 3:1 for medium and telephoto focal lengths up to 300mm and 2:1 above that.

Hence, for Nikon, 12-24 - 24-70 -70-200 - 200-400.
 
I personally think and have watched a lot of peeps doing it to... that user error is the main problem i.e with birding toggers will take a shot of a bird with a 300mm lens that for the sake of argument fills a quarter of the sensor/viewfinder and there unhappy with the result so they then buy a 600mm lens and start to take shots of birds twice as far away then moan that there latest lens is crap to and they should have spent a extra 4 grand on a own brand lens . or bought a 1.5 or 2x t.c

when in fact they should have simply learnt some field skills and got closer and filled the sensor to get the detail they required .

this is not a made up post I have seen so many peeps doing it its unreal , and listened to there moans and groans after and unfortunately done it myself but hi ho thats the learning curve
 
Last edited:
Surprised it’s taken them so long to do a 28mm and 70-200mm since they started with all the art stuff. 28mm might well find its way into my little collection.

Surprised by the 40mm though.
 
chuckles said:
Is this a good thing? Even if you accept this huge weight I always shuidder as to what compromies are created in a zoom lens when its FL range is greater than x5. 10x has to incur a big trade-off.
Click to expand...

I don't use my Sigma 50-500mm that often as I have other lenses I prefer but as a one lens solution it does the job ok.

These are at 500mm, they may not be perfect but I don't think they are that much of a compromise and if the 60-600mm is as good then it will sell fairly well I would have thought..


Nuthatch Blashly Lakes by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr


Cormorant by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr

It also focus pretty close as well which is a bonus (again at 500mm)


Peacock Butterfly by Mike.Pursey, on Flickr
 
I placed a pre-order for the 60-600mm sport today. Has anyone received one yet or know the expected shipping dates.
 
chriscross said:
How much is it/was it?
Can’t help on the dates
Click to expand...
The price seems the same everywhere in the UK at £1899. I ordered from Park Cameras who include a UV filter worth £159.

The initial target available date was end October but I guess there will be a large demand and Sigma will have to ration stock to retailers for a while. Looking forward to getting my hands on it.
 
drounding said:
The price seems the same everywhere in the UK at £1899. I ordered from Park Cameras who include a UV filter worth £159.

The initial target available date was end October but I guess there will be a large demand and Sigma will have to ration stock to retailers for a while. Looking forward to getting my hands on it.
Click to expand...
Info from Park Cameras is that they are expecting delivery on or around 21 Nov, subject to change.
 
drounding said:
The price seems the same everywhere in the UK at £1899. I ordered from Park Cameras who include a UV filter worth £159.

The initial target available date was end October but I guess there will be a large demand and Sigma will have to ration stock to retailers for a while. Looking forward to getting my hands on it.
Click to expand...
So you order a new lens for 1900 smackers then stick a filter on the front end , can’t really see a logical reason for that , like buying a pair of specs then putting a second pair on as well
 
If I had the choice and every seller had it at the same price (which is the case looking at camera price busters) I would buy the one with the free filter as well, doesn't mean I am going to use it, I would sell it on to offset the lens price.
 
Here's the Marmite bit... I might actually use the filter to help protect it, similarly I always use lens hoods for the same reason. All my other lenses have them on as well. Ok - I've said it, now I'm running away.
 
Just had an email from the delivery company, it looks like I might be receiving my lens tomorrow. Fingers crossed.
 
drounding said:
Just had an email from the delivery company, it looks like I might be receiving my lens tomorrow. Fingers crossed.
Click to expand...

It's arrived! Looking at the weather forecast though I doubt I'll get some playtime this weekend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top