Reading mode: Light Dark

Does anyone have pics shot with a sigma 50-500, 150-500, or Nikon 300mm+ 1.4TC

Go to last post
B

burtonboy

Member
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Location
CA
Trying to make up my mind between these lenses but just can't seem to do it. I don't want to regret my purchase so I need some help please thank u? Pic or info would be greatly apretiated.

Thanks
--
Daniel
 
300mm f/4 is hard to beat in its class. But would love the extra mm

Here are some of mine (with or without 1.4TC) Oh jeah, almost forgot to mention....300f/4 is also a great "close-up" lens.

Good luck with your choice.





































--
http://www.rutgerbus.nl
Photographic Moments
 
Great pics :)

I also have the 50-500 OS, and i love it, but mostly use it for birding. Did you take these pictures at 500mm or less ? Tripod ?
Cheers

Gwen
 
Thank you kindly.

1- hand held, 500mm, 1/400s, kneeling position, 30 mph crosswind
2- hand held, 500mm, 1/320s, kneeling position, calm
3- hand held, 500mm, 1/320s, waist deep in water
4- hand held, 500mm, 1/320s, waist deep in water
5- hand held, 500mm, 1/400s, prone position, breezy
6- hand held, 500mm, 1/250s, kneeling position, calm
7- hand held, 500mm, 1/250s, kneeling position, calm
8- hand held, 500mm, 1/250s, taken from a kayak
9- hand held, 500mm, 1/500s, taken from a kayak
10- hand held, 500mm, 1/500s, taken from a kayak

--
Holmes
http://holmes.zenfolio.com/
 
burtonboy said:
Trying to make up my mind between these lenses but just can't seem to do it. I don't want to regret my purchase so I need some help please thank u?
Click to expand...
If you buy the Sigmas and don't like the IQ you will definitely regret it. I think the 300mm F4 with 1.4TC will produce better detail than the sigmas.

--
Apologies if my lack of photographic knowledge is catching.
 
Danielepaolo said:
burtonboy said:
Trying to make up my mind between these lenses but just can't seem to do it. I don't want to regret my purchase so I need some help please thank u?
Click to expand...
If you buy the Sigmas and don't like the IQ you will definitely regret it. I think the 300mm F4 with 1.4TC will produce better detail than the sigmas.
Click to expand...
I agree that the 300/4 + TC has better IQ (judging this from my own 300/4 AF and Kenko Pro 1.4 TC, compared to sample shots I have seen from the Sigma 50-500 OS). That being said, the Sigma is very useful for wildlife shooting IMHO because of the massive zoom range: animals don't always stand at the perfect distance for framing (not to mention that you may want to change the framing on the fly for different shots). I had bought my 300/4 used for a very good price (read: nowhere near the cost of the Sigma), but if I had bought the AF-S version + Nikon TC, I would have been very tempted by the Sigma (which is a similar price).

IMHO the ability to adjust framing and composition with the zoom trumps the absolute superior IQ of the prime. Look at photos, not pixels, and you probably won't notice the IQ difference for most things.

Cheers
--
--Wyatt
http://photos.digitalcave.ca
All images (c) unless otherwise specified, please ask me before editing.
 
You think that even with TC the Nikon is sharper... May I ask about your sources?

I have the sigma 50-500 OS (yes it has OS and yes I can shoot at 1/100s easily even at 500mm) and like it from what I can tell from one week of owning it.

But yeah the sigma can't produce good details like a lens with a TC. :S
(pretty heavy crop below, as you can see no details at al ;) )





Btw I'm not saying the sigma is AS good at 420mm as the 300mm+TC but it does have OS which is a plus and it IS able to get good pictures with it => plus it give great versatility for close-up (at 200mm) and great range. But in the end it's up to you...
Danielepaolo said:
burtonboy said:
Trying to make up my mind between these lenses but just can't seem to do it. I don't want to regret my purchase so I need some help please thank u?
Click to expand...
If you buy the Sigmas and don't like the IQ you will definitely regret it. I think the 300mm F4 with 1.4TC will produce better detail than the sigmas.

--
Apologies if my lack of photographic knowledge is catching.
Click to expand...
 
burtonboy said:
Trying to make up my mind between these lenses but just can't seem to do it.
Click to expand...
Daniel

I have used my 300/4 for many things and I seriously doubt you would ever regret getting it.

Terry





more water polo images can be seen at: http://www.pbase.com/windancer/waterpolo







--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://www.pbase.com/windancer
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham

Remember, it's not the CPU that's in your camera that makes great images, it's the one located about 4" behind the viewfinder that does.

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise. ;-)
 
If the quality is somewhat the same between the 50 and the 150 I might have to go with the 150 since it is on sale and ends up being 800 dollars cheaper or should I just spend the money and go for the 50-500. I might just end up buying the 50 or 150 and the 300f4 since I can't make up my mind lol
--
Daniel
 
burtonboy said:
If the quality is somewhat the same between the 50 and the 150
Click to expand...
Daniel

I have no personal experience with the Sigma lens so I can't offer an opinion on it, from what I have heard it seems to be fairly decent. Good luck in whatever you choose.

Terry
--
Graham Fine Art Photography
http://www.pbase.com/windancer
http://gallery.reginaphotoclub.com/TGraham

Remember, it's not the CPU that's in your camera that makes great images, it's the one located about 4" behind the viewfinder that does.

Disclaimer: This e-mail is intended to impart a sense of humor. Given e-mail's inability to carry inflections, tone and facial expressions it may fail miserably in its intent. The sender acknowledges the limitations of the technology and assigns to the software in which this message was composed any ill feelings that may arise. ;-)
 
The Big One said:
IMHO the ability to adjust framing and composition with the zoom trumps the absolute superior IQ of the prime. Look at photos, not pixels, and you probably won't notice the IQ difference for most things.
Click to expand...
So very, very true.

I bought a Tokina 300mm F/4 a few months ago. It gets rather limited usage, my 150-500 tends to get used far more simply because of the flexibility.

IQ is really nice, but most times (for me), a little less IQ is a good tradeoff for a huge jump in flexibility (zoom + stabilization).
 
hoof said:
....but most times (for me), a little less IQ is a good tradeoff for a huge jump in flexibility (zoom + stabilization).
Click to expand...
You sum up the value of the stabilised tele-zoom quite nicely.

It allows me to shoot in scenarios where I simply could not work with a tripod or support a non-stabilised telephoto lens. The AF-S 300/4 and converter combination may offer a slightly greater amount of resolution and contrast but I cannot take advantage of its strengths in may situations without proper support. The big Sigma zooms and the Nikon 80-400 VR are wonderful answers to those of us whom find ourselves in such situations on a regular basis.

--
Holmes
http://holmes.zenfolio.com/
 
Look at http://public.fotki.com/jnuss/personal/local-birds/

The first 60 pics were shot with a Bigma on a tripod using a D50. The later
shots are with a Nikon 500mm. Most of the Bigma pics were at 500mm and
some have clarity issues. You can probably handhold that lens at 150mm or
lesss. I could never achieve crisp detail at anything over 200mm with out a
tripod. One of your decisions would be is how important is portability?
 
I just got one

@500mm cropped (300S)



@210mm



So far so good. I also have the 300 2.8 & 70/200 w 2XEIII, this lens is real flexible 500mm w OS it's hand holdable

Had a 500 AIP f4. Not hand holdable, same with Tamron 50/500 @ 500

--
Rags
 
If I do go with the 300f4 what would be a good brand of teleconverter be? Should I go nikon?
--
Daniel
 
http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/228-nikkor-af-s-300mm-f4d-if-ed-review--test-report

For a crop-camera I can recommend the TC14, and for a fullframe (with lower pixel-density) I recommend TC17. AF will still work fine, even though people are talking about f/5.6 as a definitive limit, that is just not there in real life.

You just can't get the versatility of a zoom and the IQ of a prime in one lens, but then again, wildlife almost always needs more focal-length anyway.

And you should remember that the new (and much more expensive) 50-500OS is better than the older ones. As always with Sigma you have to cherry-pick a good sample.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top