odd jim
Flimsiest Lambresta
- Messages
- 9,209
- Name
- Jim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You're best off just linking from Flickr:IMAGES NOW DELETED AS THEY HAVE NOT SHOWN AT THE SIZE I PROCESSED THEM AT (1200 px long). IS THERE A SIZE LIMIT FOR THIS SITE ?
You're best off just linking from Flickr:IMAGES NOW DELETED AS THEY HAVE NOT SHOWN AT THE SIZE I PROCESSED THEM AT (1200 px long). IS THERE A SIZE LIMIT FOR THIS SITE ?
The trouble is that 1200 pixels wide is not a native size on Flickr, if I upload a 1200 px image on Flickr then would it show as 1200 px on here?You're best off just linking from Flickr:
Ok, but why is it so crucial to show it as 1200 PX?The trouble is that 1200 pixels wide is not a native size on Flickr, if I upload a 1200 px image on Flickr then would it show as 1200 px on here?
EDIT: just uploaded a 1200 pixel wide image to flickr and it resizes it down to 1024 so I am no better off linking it to my Flickr account.
It is not crucial but I have processed the shots I was going to put on at 1200 px for another forum - I will now resize/re process them to 1024 px like the other shots I have put on this thread.Ok, but why is it so crucial to show it as 1200 PX?
A Flickr BB code link will also provide you with a far higher quality image than uploading straight to here, which always seems to soften images.
Further to my earlier post, attached are a few shots taken with the Siggy 'C' that I would have struggled with my Tammy. Not up to much I will admit but not too bad the focal length-price ratio IMHO.
Photobucket also induces softness to the images, Flickr is far betterIt is not crucial but I have processed the shots I was going to put on at 1200 px for another forum - I will now resize/re process them to 1024 px like the other shots I have put on this thread.
BTW I do not upload straight to this site anyway, I link to photobucket which I find better than flickr for this purpose.
Not IMO and I have been using Flickr for many years. If you are happy with linking to Flickr then that is great - each to their ownPhotobucket also induces softness to the images, Flickr is far better
I was just pointing something out, PB has been truly awful for me.Not IMO and I have been using Flickr for many years. If you are happy with linking to Flickr then that is great - each to their own
PS, I look forward to seeing some of your brilliant bird shots on here.
I mentioned bird shots because 600mm and heavy crops do look a lot different from a lesser focal length that has not been cropped heavily, all my shots are 600mm and big crops so they do not look that good and I am the first to admit it.I was just pointing something out, PB has been truly awful for me.
Why mention my bird shots? Not sure if that's a dig? I bought my lens for Motorsport and other wildlife, not birds, though I tested it out on some birds and red squirrels as a matter of fact. If you scroll up, you'll see one of my bird shots, though it's just a grab shot as the lens was being tested so I doubt it would excite anyone.
When I click on the BB code all I get is a link to PinterestThats the "share" code Roy not the bb code mate
I was clicking on the BB icon and not the words above LOL - thanks for that StuartThats the "share" code Roy not the bb code mate
It'll be absolutely fine. The 550d is more than capable, though if you don't have a grip you might want to consider adding one for use with this lens.Has anyone any experience of using this lens on a far from top end Canon (550D)? I've been considering getting either Sigma or Tamron for a long time and, getting close to pressing 'buy now' have come down on the side of Sigma for no better reason than price. It's significantly cheaper than the Tamron atm and certainly a lot more affordable than when I first looked. I have no intention of using a TC with it. I'm currently using the Tamron 70-300 for birds. So would the 150-600 be okay with my camera, given that the camera itself doesn't have all the bells and whistles?
Brilliant. I didn't think there'd be a problem but...........I think I'll pass on the grip for now - small hands that are a bit the worse for wear. Small and light suits me, but I'll see how it goes and if it's all too unbalanced a grip is something to consider.It'll be absolutely fine. The 550d is more than capable, though if you don't have a grip you might want to consider adding one for use with this lens.
I don't think I'll be taking mine hill walking with me....! It's just for wildlife, mainly in hides where I can use the beanbag. I can't wait to order it now. Just the small matter of a bill to pay off first!I use my sigma attached to a canon 100d without any problems. I enen enjoy carrying it on long walks.
First thing I would do Simon is to connect the dock (after downloading the SOP app) It will check that the lens firmware is up to date.Hi everyone,
My copy arrived in the post today together with the dock... any tips/setup advice I need to know about, also any IQ issues I need to check for?
Thanks
Simon
Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).to be honest Roy, and only IMHO, there is just a little bit of softness in (some) of the images - I think that maybe they could be sharpened a little more in pp without a detrimental effect - but it certainly looks a very good lens for the money
did you take the images as RAW or jpeg?
also maybe if you "back off" with the crop a little it would help
not at all a criticism, but you an observation - I am looking at the images on my 5K screen
(the Stonechat and pigeon look really good)
Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).
I always shoot in RAW (cannot remember the last time I took a jpeg image) and I also have a fully calibrated IPS monitor so do know the flaws in the lens. With regards to the sharpening I blow hot and cold over just how much an image should be sharpened (I use selective sharpening with layer masks and also some topaz plug-ins) - at the moment I am in a 'less sharping mode' because there as so many images out there that are woefully over sharpened and look dreadful to me. Backing off with the cropping is a valued comment but at the end of the day images from this lens are never going to be up to the much more expensive super teles that's for sure - you get what you pay for.
One thing I have noticed with this lens is that it performs a lot better with my FF (5D3) than the 7D2 but I am mostly always range limited for birds so tend to use the 7D2 most of the time - this image was taken on the 7D2). Anyway thanks for you feedback Bill, this thread is very limiting as far as good banter goes.
The only softness I've noticed on mine was down to user error (camera movement).Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).
I always shoot in RAW (cannot remember the last time I took a jpeg image) and I also have a fully calibrated IPS monitor so do know the flaws in the lens. With regards to the sharpening I blow hot and cold over just how much an image should be sharpened (I use selective sharpening with layer masks and also some topaz plug-ins) - at the moment I am in a 'less sharping mode' because there as so many images out there that are woefully over sharpened and look dreadful to me. Backing off with the cropping is a valued comment but at the end of the day images from this lens are never going to be up to the much more expensive super teles that's for sure - you get what you pay for.
One thing I have noticed with this lens is that it performs a lot better with my FF (5D3) than the 7D2 but I am mostly always range limited for birds so tend to use the 7D2 most of the time - this image was taken on the 7D2). Anyway thanks for you feedback Bill, this thread is very limiting as far as good banter goes.
PS, just noticed that I had put the wrong curlew image up LOL. now rectified.
Well I guess its all subjective, I am comparing mine with shots I have taken in the past with a couple of Canon super teles and it is certainly not up to those lenses as you would expect. At the end of the day if these cheap(ish) third party lenses were as good as the much more expensive offerings from Canon and Nikon they why would anyone pay £5k or more for a big super tele - there is a reason, and its not just that they are faster. The biggest difference I find is in really fine detail on birds feathers and also the crop-ability of distant shots. If I could handle the weight of a Canon 500/4 IS MkII I would sell my Siggy tomorrow.The only softness I've noticed on mine was down to user error (camera movement).
I'm finding this to be a very, very sharp lens, even maxed out to 600mm
First thing I would do Simon is to connect the dock (after downloading the SOP app) It will check that the lens firmware is up to date.
For handolding set the OS (via the dock) to dynamic
You could also set one of the customisation AF speed settings to 'Focus' and one to 'Speed' if you want
For shooting at the long end it pays to stop down to f8 IMO
If shooting on a tripod make sure you turn the OS off.
For hand holding: although the OS is very good always make sure you have a reasonable shutter speed for the focal length you are using - you may occasional get sharp shots at ridiculously slow shutter speeds but use a decent shutter speed for consistency.
Other than that you are going to get the best IQ by shooting in RAW, using a good workflow and practicing all the usual photographic skills.
Yes indeed, it's not going to compare directly to a 500mm f/4 but I'm comparing it to my shorter Canon L lenses, a couple of well regarded Sigma EX lenses and some nice Canon primesWell I guess its all subjective, I am comparing mine with shots I have taken in the past with a couple of Canon super teles and it is certainly not up to those lenses as you would expect. At the end of the day if these cheap(ish) third party lenses were as good as the much more expensive offerings from Canon and Nikon they why would anyone pay £5k or more for a big super tele - there is a reason, and its not just that they are faster. The biggest difference I find is in really fine detail on birds feathers and also the crop-ability of distant shots. If I could handle the weight of a Canon 500/4 IS MkII I would sell my Siggy tomorrow.
I am glad you are liking your lens though.
Good for you I am glad you are enjoying the lens. I have several other Canon L lenses but I find it hard to compare Macro, landscape and 70-200 lens with a long tele zoom like this. As I have only used the lens 7 or 8 times in the last 6 months I am not that bothered to be honest, at the price its a nice lens for the occasional birding sortieYes indeed, it's not going to compare directly to a 500mm f/4 but I'm comparing it to my shorter Canon L lenses, a couple of well regarded Sigma EX lenses and some nice Canon primes
What you do Bob is to assign dynamic OS (via the dock) to one of the two custom configurations (say C1). You can then then switch the C1 set on or off via the lens switch, if you do not switch C1 or C2 on then the lens will be at its default settings.as @Roy C knows i have been deliberating for a while and took the plunge about 3 weeks ago unfortunately due to circumstances have not had a real chance to use it extensively or even plug the dock in, its replacing a 300f4+1.4 converter, the little I have used the Sigma I have to say i am impressed with af speed and sharpness.
Have been following this thread for along time the custom setting that everyone appears to like is OS set to dynamic, does this have to be done via a custom setting or does it remain set in normal use?
What you do Bob is to assign dynamic OS (via the dock) to one of the two custom configurations (say C1). You can then then switch the C1 set on or off via the lens switch, if you do not switch C1 or C2 on then the lens will be at its default settings.
BTW if nothing else its worth doing the firmware update (via the dock)
EDIT: With C1, C2 and OFF you have in effect 3 different lens configurations, also you can switch the OS off on the lens which will nullify any setting you have in C1 or C2 with regards to the OS.
If you set-your own focus limiters this will take effect for all the configration including the focus limiter switch on the lens - you cannot revert back to the default limiters unless you go back in via the dock and re-configure it back.