Which Bigma ?

S

Skypilot

Messages
371
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm wondering about getting a Bigma but when looking I see there are several different variants: 50-500, 150-500, 170-500 and maybe more for all I know.

It's only the long end I need so which is the best one to go for please ?
 
The 170-500 is quite old and I've only shot with it on Canon. Its reasonable.

The Bigma 50-500 I used recently and it was a lot better than I remembered.

I've not been impressed with anything I've seen out of the 150-500, even web images seem to be desperately over-sharpened. Most folks reckon the older 50-500 is better optically.

If it was my money, the only one I'd consider would be the 50-500.
 
I think the general concensus is that the less the zoom range, the better the lens. So from these, either the 150-500 or the 170-500 I guess.

EDIT: OK, maybe ignore what I posted.
 
Hi there ive got the sigma 150-500mm apo dg os for sale in the classifieds section on here, there are some shots that have been taken with this len's on the link.......(y)(y)
 
I've got the 170-500 It's ok till around 400mm, after that it isn't very sharp at all. From what I've seen the 50-500mm is the sharpest of the lot.


chris.
 
My £0.02 worth - I had a 50-500mm BIGMA ....once! Far too soft across the range for what I wanted it for - which at the end of the day was sharp pictures of sports as players moved up and down the field of play. I am now on the prime path for both footy and cricket - using a second body with a 70-200mm or 24-105mm telephoto depending on where I am and what I am shooting. In my very humble opinion, the BIGMA was not big on image quality.

Alan
 
I've just bought the 150-500 (CAF) yesterday & it's looking good so far :)

From this morning, the light was terrible so the shutter speed is too low & the ISO too high :bang:

test_sq.jpg
 
isn't the 50-500 know as a vacuum cleaner as well due to the long range it literally sucks all sorts in?
 
From the reviews i have seen over time it would appear the 50-500 is the one to go for
 
Here's a crop at 100% from a picture of the moon with the 50-500 on a canon 400D
http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh40/parsleywok/_MG_6529croplevels.jpg

and after sharpening with usm
http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/hh40/parsleywok/_MG_6529cropusmlevels.jpg

I took ages deciding whether to buy one and finally Jessops had it on sale + I had some vouchers to use and was afraid they'd go bankrupt first...

I'd had the same question and found some good comparisons (you might like to try searching a range of photography forums). The consensus seemed to be the 50-500 was on average a bit sharper than the 150-500, but more expensive and without OS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top