Beginner Taking sharper shots with the Sigma 150-500mm

Higher shutter speed, looking at the figures for the 2nd grey squirrel 1/20 of a second at 340mm is not going to produce sharp images.
 
Last edited:
You're going to hate me for saying this, but... you may not be able to. The Bigma has a very wide range of zoom, and it sacrifices a little sharpness for that. The other thing would be to forget hand holding. The best piece of advice I was ever given for wildlife was to always use a tripod or beanbag.
 
deeley_s said:
You're going to hate me for saying this, but... you may not be able to. The Bigma has a very wide range of zoom, and it sacrifices a little sharpness for that. The other thing would be to forget hand holding. The best piece of advice I was ever given for wildlife was to always use a tripod or beanbag.
Click to expand...

I disagree slightly with the first part of this. Having owned the 150-500, I know that sharp images are possible (although their can be differences between copies) however this is a lens that needs good light, technique and correct exposure to get the best from it.

Personally from looking at your shots I'd say that most look a little under exposed, as most of the details are in the brighter segment try to concentrate on getting the exposure right in camera or even shooting a little to the right.
Other things I do is never shooting slower than 1/effective focal length ie at 500mm using a shutter speed faster than 1/500 (full frame), if you've got an apsc (crop) sensor then at least 1/800. I also normally use a monopod for extra stability
 
deeley_s said:
You're going to hate me for saying this, but... you may not be able to. The Bigma has a very wide range of zoom, and it sacrifices a little sharpness for that. The other thing would be to forget hand holding. The best piece of advice I was ever given for wildlife was to always use a tripod or beanbag.
Click to expand...

Ok it depends on the person regarding their abilities to handhold 2-5kg of lens, but its not impossible, been doing it for many years with a 300mm f2.8 (3kg) and recently purchased 500mm f4 (4kg), yes monopods help, and tripods provide sturdy platforms to shot from, but its all about camera settings and most importantly light conditions. The sigma 150-500mm isn't renowned for being sharp wide open, so you'll need to stop down an f-stop or 2 to get the best results, which means higher shutter speeds. If you starting out with long lenses and struggling to get things sharp, then you shutter speeds too low. Some people hate this, but its a good guide to go by. 1/Focal length of lens equals shutter speed give or take. So 500mm lens requires a shutter speed of 1/500 sec, but with a crop, you can add 1.5 or 1.6x to the equation, so you might need to up the shutter speed. Taking images in grey overcast poor light isn't going to give you great images, especially with a long lens, you need light to achieve your best settings.

Many people ask questions on here about shutter speeds, especially for action photography, and you get the idiots that say, well I can get sharp shots at 1/80 1/50 sec with a 500mm lens, I'd probably say, their hit rate after they machine gunned the subject to death with fps is very poor and they may get one decent shot. If you don't need a slow shutter speed, then don't use one, or only start to use the slower shutter speeds when you become more confident taking images at the slower speeds with your lens, but don't just whack the shutter speed down, reduce it down in stages.
 
A monopod can help too and upping the ISO for a faster shutter speed.
 
Thanks for the replies.

I too have to disagree with deeley_s as I have seen lots of shots on flickr taken with the lens and they are mostly sharp.

I've learnt to handle the lens in such a way that it doesn't move around much, except for when it's windy though.
I try not to use a 500mm focal length as it's not the bestest quality. I normally set it to 400 or less.

I realize that photos are often better if taken in sunlight. As we're not having much sun at the moment, I'm wanting to use the lens in dull conditions.

This is how I set my camera up
AV mode
ISO 200/400
Auto white balance (I can change it in Lightroom)
Partial or Spot metering
AF Point selection set in the middle
Camera set to F/8.....I only set it to this number because it is said to be sharpest?


Depending on the weather next week, I'll go out and use the tripod.

Edit: I also use Landscape as my Picture Style
 
Last edited:
Last year in September we had a holiday in Scotland.
We see herons all the time up there, but they are shy creatures and fly away as soon as they see or hear you.

Although I don't like it because it is kind of soft/blurry, this is the best shot I took on a dull morning.

f/8
500mm
1/400
ISO 800


Heron by DaelPix, on Flickr
 
Dael_Pix said:
Thanks for the replies.

I too have to disagree with deeley_s as I have seen lots of shots on flickr taken with the lens and they are mostly sharp.

I've learnt to handle the lens in such a way that it doesn't move around much, except for when it's windy though.
I try not to use a 500mm focal length as it's not the bestest quality. I normally set it to 400 or less.

I realize that photos are often better if taken in sunlight. As we're not having much sun at the moment, I'm wanting to use the lens in dull conditions.

This is how I set my camera up
AV mode
ISO 200/400
Auto white balance (I can change it in Lightroom)
Partial or Spot metering
AF Point selection set in the middle
Camera set to F/8.....I only set it to this number because it is said to be sharpest?


Depending on the weather next week, I'll go out and use the tripod.

Edit: I also use Landscape as my Picture Style
Click to expand...


I am guess by keeping the ISO at 200/400 you are trying to reduce the amount of noise but you are going to have to comprise because of the poor light.

A picture taken with higher ISO and noise that has no camera shake/animal movement may be better than a shaky picture with low noise levels.

The noise you may be able to reduce in post processing but you cannot remove the blur caused by movement/shake.
 
I'll throw in a real wild card and mention "practice" and lots of it :exit:
 
The 1/focal length thing is old hat and best ignored, it comes from a time of film and now most modern digital cameras out-resolve what film was able to do, hence modern digitals' higher resolution "magnifies" camera movement and the 1/over just isn't reliable enough; you're better off using at least 1/2xfocal length hence a 500mm lens would need at least 1/1000th sec to stand a good chance of being sharp. Monopods help a lot too in reducing your camera shake but your subject may be moving too fast for a slower shutter speed - this is why VR/IS is pretty pointless much of the time too as although it helps you be more stable it does nothing for the subjects' movement

huffy is spot on - a noisy image that's sharp is far better than a noise-free blurred one

I was having this exact conversation a few months ago when I came across an article written by Andy Rouse (one of the UK's top wildlife chaps) where he clearly stated that (even in Kenya on a sunny day) he shoots at 2000 ISO as a MINIMUM - why - because (I paraphrase)

I'd rather have a bit of noise in a sharp image than a cleaner blurred one

I don't know what camera the OP has but there aren't many that can't return an acceptable amount of noise at 1000 ISO these days, especially with such good NR software in such as Lightroom; so I'd take that as a starting point and if your camera is good at higher ISO then shoot at it, you really need to get the shutter speed UP with longer lenses especially :)

Dave
 
DG Phototraining said:
The 1/focal length thing is old hat and best ignored, it comes from a time of film and now most modern digital cameras out-resolve what film was able to do, hence modern digitals' higher resolution "magnifies" camera movement and the 1/over just isn't reliable enough; you're better off using at least 1/2xfocal length hence a 500mm lens would need at least 1/1000th sec to stand a good chance of being sharp. Monopods help a lot too in reducing your camera shake but your subject may be moving too fast for a slower shutter speed - this is why VR/IS is pretty pointless much of the time too as although it helps you be more stable it does nothing for the subjects' movement

huffy is spot on - a noisy image that's sharp is far better than a noise-free blurred one

I was having this exact conversation a few months ago when I came across an article written by Andy Rouse (one of the UK's top wildlife chaps) where he clearly stated that (even in Kenya on a sunny day) he shoots at 2000 ISO as a MINIMUM - why - because (I paraphrase)

I'd rather have a bit of noise in a sharp image than a cleaner blurred one

I don't know what camera the OP has but there aren't many that can't return an acceptable amount of noise at 1000 ISO these days, especially with such good NR software in such as Lightroom; so I'd take that as a starting point and if your camera is good at higher ISO then shoot at it, you really need to get the shutter speed UP with longer lenses especially :)

Dave
Click to expand...
Complete load of rubbish :rolleyes:
 
Neil B said:
I'll throw in a real wild card and mention "practice" and lots of it :exit:
Click to expand...
.... And then yet more practice :D

Also you mention that you shoot in Landscape setting, I'm guessing you mean the picture style. Are you shooting JPEG? If so are you doing any further sharpening in Post Process? I'm not sure how much sharpening the Landscape setting applies as the default as I shoot in RAW and apply sharpening myself as required, I then sharpen again on export. However from the pictures I've seen, you are mainly a victim of poor lighting. Sometimes you just have to put the camera away and enjoy a nice walk instead.
 
DG Phototraining said:
huffy is spot on - a noisy image that's sharp is far better than a noise-free blurred one
Click to expand...

:agree:

DG Phototraining said:
I was having this exact conversation a few months ago when I came across an article written by Andy Rouse (one of the UK's top wildlife chaps) where he clearly stated that (even in Kenya on a sunny day) he shoots at 2000 ISO as a MINIMUM - why - because (I paraphrase)

I'd rather have a bit of noise in a sharp image than a cleaner blurred one
Click to expand...

The OP has a 450D according to his profile.

Friend had a day shooting aircraft with Andy (I think he should stick to wildlife) and that's what he told the group, this has certainly helped my friend who tended to produce lots of soft images because he struggled to hold the longer lenses at the slower shutter speeds because of camera shake.

But I don't agree that 1/focal is outdated, I think the rule as a guide still works today for the longer lenses when setting shutter speeds
 
huffy said:
I am guess by keeping the ISO at 200/400 you are trying to reduce the amount of noise but you are going to have to comprise because of the poor light.

A picture taken with higher ISO and noise that has no camera shake/animal movement may be better than a shaky picture with low noise levels.

The noise you may be able to reduce in post processing but you cannot remove the blur caused by movement/shake.
Click to expand...

Correct.


ChrisHeathcote said:
.... And then yet more practice :D

Also you mention that you shoot in Landscape setting, I'm guessing you mean the picture style. Are you shooting JPEG? If so are you doing any further sharpening in Post Process? I'm not sure how much sharpening the Landscape setting applies as the default as I shoot in RAW and apply sharpening myself as required, I then sharpen again on export. However from the pictures I've seen, you are mainly a victim of poor lighting. Sometimes you just have to put the camera away and enjoy a nice walk instead.
Click to expand...

I never shoot in JPEG. I go RAW all the way.
Yes, landscape as in the picture style, which is what I wrote.

I sharpen all my photos in lightroom, although I didn't like the way it sharpened photos when I first bought Lightroom last year, I've gotten used to it now.
 
Dael_Pix said:
Thanks for the replies.

I too have to disagree with deeley_s as I have seen lots of shots on flickr taken with the lens and they are mostly sharp.

I've learnt to handle the lens in such a way that it doesn't move around much, except for when it's windy though.
I try not to use a 500mm focal length as it's not the bestest quality. I normally set it to 400 or less.

I realize that photos are often better if taken in sunlight. As we're not having much sun at the moment, I'm wanting to use the lens in dull conditions.

This is how I set my camera up
AV mode
ISO 200/400
Auto white balance (I can change it in Lightroom)
Partial or Spot metering
AF Point selection set in the middle
Camera set to F/8.....I only set it to this number because it is said to be sharpest?...
Click to expand...
This is what happens when you read so much information on the web and you don't filter it with common sense.
The problem with your images is a slow shutter speed, a low shutter speed directly caused by:
A low ISO because photographers complain about high ISO noise
A small aperture because the lens isn't 'sharp' wider open.

Only photographers care about noise, if you take a fantastic image at high ISO, no-one will complain about the noise, you might feel it detracts, but no one else will care.

A sharp image of a blurry subject isn't better than a slightly less sharp image of a perfectly sharp subject.

Complete aside:
But my favourite part of this thread is 'the lens is perfectly capable of sharp shots' immediately followed by 'I try not to use a 500mm focal length as it's not the bestest quality. I normally set it to 400 or less.'

'Landscape mode'? Picture styles are irrelevant if you're shooting RAW, your best starting point are the flat ones that do no processing at all.
 
Phil V said:
'Landscape mode'? Picture styles are irrelevant if you're shooting RAW, your best starting point are the flat ones that do no processing at all.
Click to expand...

Such as 'Standard' ?
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
How strange. I commented on a reply on my last post and now it's disappeared.

Anyway....
I actually typed neutral and faithful, but changed it to standard lol.. I think I'll just leave it as standard as I can change it in LR anyway.

Just been out with the lens and took some shots of Mallard ducks flapping their wings while in the water. I tried taking shots at 1/500, but the photos came out dark. I've just realized that I could have compensated for it. Going out tomorrow if it's bright and sunny like today.

I'm quite proud of myself in the following two photos, as I didn't need to do anything with it, just sharpen and turn down the highlights a little. The final photo is the best out of four photos I took. I shot all the photos at ISO 100 and I hardly have any noise on them.

Canada Goose by DaelPix, on Flickr
Canada Goose by DaelPix, on Flickr

Mallard Duck by DaelPix, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
It's all about having the best light conditions, but as others have mentioned, you can take images with ISO setting greater than 400, you'll still get great images, and there's lots of add on like noise ninja which can clean up the images when you carry out your pp
 
I have one of these. It's not my favourite by any means, i use Canon "L"series,But in good light it gives "Bang for Buck"
This is taken at 500mm. 800/sec @6.3 ISO 400
View attachment 27998
 
MotoGP_2014_08_30_0590 by Jon_Chalk, on Flickr

Practice and more practice - that's the only thing that's worked for me. Plus everything most have suggested above - so this is 1/1250, f9 and 267mm + ISO800 on a dull day - as long as you keep it away from the extremes of zoom and aperture, it's just fine.

The image below looks soft on here, but check the Flickr version for just how sharp you can get with the 150-500. Handheld.

View attachment 28002
 
Last edited:
+1 on good value for money. I have been using one since my 100-400 failed and my sister lent me one.

All pics have been downsized for web publishing and sharpened when Pping.

#1 Canon 40D 1/1600 @ f8 ISO 800 and F=500, monopod was used.

Surfer by dicktay2000, on Flickr

#2 Canon 40D 1/1600 @ f8 ISO 400 and F=500, monopod

Butterfly by dicktay2000, on Flickr

#3 Canon 40D 1/320 @ f8 ISO 200 and F=370mm, monopod

Racing in spring by dicktay2000, on Flickr

The only real downside for me is that it could be sharper wide open especially at 500mm and it doesn't focus real fast (not good when shooting fast moving subjects).

I almost always use a monopd with this lens as i find it gets very heavy especially on long shoots.
 
Last edited:
I want to take photos using more than 1/250 but the photos become dark.

How can I achieve it?
 
Dael_Pix said:
I want to take photos using more than 1/250 but the photos become dark.

How can I achieve it?
Click to expand...

If there is not enough light you will have to raise the ISO or reduce the F number.
 
Dael_Pix said:
I want to take photos using more than 1/250 but the photos become dark.

How can I achieve it?
Click to expand...

forget the cobblers about F8 being the sharpest setting - F5.6 / 6.3 may be marginally less sharp but its nothing compared to the unsharpness caused by camera wobble. Also forget about keeping the ISO low - noise is better than wobble too

if you specifically want a fast shutter then set the camera to TV and set the shutter speed you want, and put the camera on Auto ISO - the camera will open the apperture and raise the iso to allow the shutter speed (that said you are still limited by the available light, so you can't just set 4000/sec and leave it there regardless)

Also make sure the OS on your lens is turned on , and that you are holding the lens with your left hand , body with your right (not both hands on the body like you might with a short lens)
 
Thanks Pete.

I was going to use Tv mode and put the ISO on auto tomorrow and see what results I get. I'll post images again if I get any decent shots.

I always have the OS on the first setting.
 
also i'd forget the stuff about 500mm not being sharp - again thats pixel peeping stuff with no relevance to the real world. Why buy a 500mm if you arent going to use it to its full capability.

The other thing about hand holding is you are a lot more stable leaning on something, sitting down, kneeling or lying down than you are standing - getting low can also make for more pleasing pictures anyway so going prone is a win win , just take a bin bag or something to lie on
 
Decided not to go out today because it's cloudy. Also my car insurance wasn't auto-renewed when it should have been, so I dare not go out in it, (but it should be fine though)
 
Last edited:
I went out to a local pond and took this and I don't think it is all that bad.

f/6.3
500mm
1/640
ISO 800
Mallard duck by DaelPix, on Flickr
 
when you use a long lens David you get less technical "keepers" than with a shorter lens

light is very important, not only absolute light but how the highlights and shadows fall on the bird - unless you look at these when you take the shot, you can be disappointed when you process the image. Ideally you want to use the best light position as it can vary within a few yards of the position you are taking the shot from

You need to be familiar with your camera settings and I would experiment ……. with all types of settings ………but I would say that one of the most important aspects to get consistency with long lens photography is to use a tripod if possible, monopod or bean bag if not - but you say that you want to use the lens "hand held" ….. if so it can be hit or miss even with a good technique and much will depend on the light conditions allowing you to use the most appropriate camera settings ….. today I have been out with my 300mm f2.8 - quite a heavy lens to hand hold ……. even if I get a good hand held shot, the light is so bad that the image will suffer ………..

Highlights and shadows need carefully consideration if you want to achieve detail and LR and PS can help with this but can only go so far
 
Folks,
I didn't say the Bigma is soft. I said It sacrifices a little sharpness for the wide zoom range. There's no such thing as an optical free lunch. I used to own the Bigma. It's not a bad lens. But if you are after the ultimate in sharpness, no zoom is going to give that to you. Here's a hare shot with the Bigma, and one with a fixed prime at a similar distance.View attachment 28303 View attachment 28302
 
It can take a couple of seconds to get the o's to stabilise or spin itself up, at least on the Sony version

Theres sample variation too, I tried one that was extremely sharp wide open, others arent
 
Seems to me the issue here isn't a question of lenses but one of basic understanding of exposure and shutter speed requirements WRT focal length and subject speed...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top