For all you Sigma critics, look at this...Bigma resolving...

[Brett DiMichele]

Like I said.. Post some 100% RAW crops from any L Glass you want..

I will post examples too..

Of course the sensor behind the glass is just as important and I do sort of
have an unfair advantage in the single pixel resolution department But
that's ok.. It would be fun anyway! =)

It's just an illusion as I said further up:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1031&message=8503938

Just have a look at a crop out of context (100% crop from the
original poster's image, right in the focal plane):



Are you impressed now with the image quality of Bigma. Nothing
spectacular for sure. I would guess that L glass will perform
better at any distance. So in that sense I would think that
Daniella is probably right (I don't have any first hand experience
with L glass). Would I pay a massive amount of cash for that
difference - NO WAY BAHAHAHA!

Cheers, Andy

1. This image is not very sharp. Canon 400mm and 100-400mm can
deliver sharper images. And they are not too much more expensive.

2. As Daliella pointed out, it is a close distance object. Many
lenses do better at close distance.

Kai

This is an unsharpend picture of a Sigma 50-500 at 500mm a 7.1 t
1/200 flash fired at 4 meter.

Just to silence all critics about this lens. Adding scharpening to
this picture is very hard. It already lookes overscharpend out of
the box. Picture is raw with camera sharpening -2. Im not trying to
show my talents as a fotographer with this picture but im pretty
sure that beating this kind of resolving power at this focal length
requires looods of cash...

Ps look at the spot of glucoom eyedeziese in the eye...

--
http://www.pbase.com/kaihui

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[a_hamann]

... we posted the same comment at the same time.

Go ahead and find a nice stable target and shoot from about 40' on
a small
section of the target and then straight out of the camera (RAW) use a
100% Crop in PhotoShop and post the results at the near the far and
the
middle end of the lens from wide open up to about F10...

Even IF I had an EF Mount on my camera.... I know what lenses I
would
buy for it...

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[Josh4fun]

Like I said.. Post some 100% RAW crops from any L Glass you want..

I will post examples too..

Of course the sensor behind the glass is just as important and I do
sort of
have an unfair advantage in the single pixel resolution department
But
that's ok.. It would be fun anyway! =)

Brett what is that image?...I can't make of it. My first impression was that it is the tip nose of a Babboon...is it?...no pun intended. I don't know what it is. Oh wait...I think it might be from a Rooster or something...I don't know. Just to soften things a bit here I volunteer to answer your question of posting some L glass per your request. Here's a couple of them shot by my Bigma.....lol
Just for fun okay.....cheers.



--
Jonji
Please visit my gallery at: http://www.fotop.net/Josh4fun/Josh4fun

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Josh,

Thanks.. I am ROTFLOL

"At least they look Professional" =)

Like I said.. Post some 100% RAW crops from any L Glass you want..

I will post examples too..

Of course the sensor behind the glass is just as important and I do
sort of
have an unfair advantage in the single pixel resolution department
But
that's ok.. It would be fun anyway! =)

Brett what is that image?...I can't make of it. My first impression
was that it is the tip nose of a Babboon...is it?...no pun
intended. I don't know what it is. Oh wait...I think it might be
from a Rooster or something...I don't know. Just to soften things a
bit here I volunteer to answer your question of posting some L
glass per your request. Here's a couple of them shot by my
Bigma.....lol
Just for fun okay.....cheers.



--
Jonji
Please visit my gallery at: http://www.fotop.net/Josh4fun/Josh4fun

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[Brett DiMichele]

I have some test images shot from 40-50 foot with my 100/300F4 at
every apeture from F4.0 up to F10 and they are all sharp even at F4.0
I would use it... (and have) and this is of a subject that is maybe 4" across
when looking at it in the real world..

How very, very odd indeed!

I have just returned my Sigma 100-300 F4 for that very reason. I
wanted a lens that could retain its sharpness so birds in fight
would not be fuzzy.

I thought the Bigma was universally well regarded.
--
Misha

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[BigMike]

Whoah drip, don't turn this into an ego contest, and worse yet, over camera lenses? Daniella is offering her opinion. If she finds L lens to be more to her preference, then that's the way it is. If you find Bigma more to your liking, than that's also the way it is. Daniella is an extraordinary photographer, and when somebody reaches the level she has, when they talk, I listen. Doesn't mean I always have to agree, but I damm well listen. I have seen her get more out of the kit lens, then most people could get out of the Bigma, or L glass. Is she really that good? You better beleive it.

 

[jarobe]

This is an unsharpend picture of a Sigma 50-500 at 500mm a 7.1 t
1/200 flash fired at 4 meter.

Just to silence all critics about this lens. Adding scharpening to
this picture is very hard. It already lookes overscharpend out of
the box. Picture is raw with camera sharpening -2. Im not trying to
show my talents as a fotographer with this picture but im pretty
sure that beating this kind of resolving power at this focal length
requires looods of cash...

Ps look at the spot of glucoom eyedeziese in the eye...

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Round Two is comming...

I don't have the BigMa but I am on a mission now.... It's not gonna be
pretty... But it will be Pretty Funny!

This is an unsharpend picture of a Sigma 50-500 at 500mm a 7.1 t
1/200 flash fired at 4 meter.

Just to silence all critics about this lens. Adding scharpening to
this picture is very hard. It already lookes overscharpend out of
the box. Picture is raw with camera sharpening -2. Im not trying to
show my talents as a fotographer with this picture but im pretty
sure that beating this kind of resolving power at this focal length
requires looods of cash...

Ps look at the spot of glucoom eyedeziese in the eye...

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[jase]

Probably because as a rule L lenses have much wider apertures so you are using a higher shutter speed and are not getting camera shake.

I can see a hudge difference in the way the L lenses retain their
sharpness for distant subjects as opposed to non L lenses.

How is that?

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Mike,

Being "good" or even "Great" for that matter has absolutely nothing to do
with this debate (It's hardly an argument..). I have seen Daniella's art work
from back when she posted on the Olympus forums and there is NO doubt
that she has a fantastic eye.

But this is a debate about lenses.. This is pure and simple measurbating.
And if you come in and offer your opinion and then ask people to prove
you wrong you are going to get response.

I am going to try my best to prove her wrong. If I fail then so be it.. But
I honestly disagree with her opinion of the L glass and there are thousands
of others who agree with me on this. L glass is fantastic glass and so is
Sigma EX.. They ARE in the same league and that's what I will show

And if anyone wants to counter my results I would highly enjoy it. I know
as of late you are a bit fed up with these forums (Yes I do lurk here...) but
there is no argument here. This is just a friendly debate and I plan to
interject some humor and some data.

=)

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[Daniella68313]

I can see a hudge difference in the way the L lenses retain their
sharpness for distant subjects as opposed to non L lenses.

How is that?

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

 

[jase]

You know the trouble with this sort of thread is that it is more for affirmation than for information. Someone spends some hard earned cash on a new toy, feels guilty about it and seeks reassurance from others that what they have done is a good thing. Now feeling a little more emotionally secure about their hobby they receive a comment on their toy that is negative. The new toy, being the product of a lot of hard work and having all sorts of emotions attached to it is psychologically a part of the person that bought it. Criticising the toy is a personal criticism, that must be rebuffed, the toy must be defended, 'how dare you insult my toy, my toy's better than your toy'.

Get real, get objective there is no point getting emotional over this sh&t. People saying that their bigma is better than any L glass that don't actually own any L glass are just gassing and vice versa.

You will know if the Bigma is better in a few years. If it is, Canon will stop making everything from the 50mm 1.4L to the EF 500 F/4L and all the zooms in between as they are more expensive and according to the Bigma owners club, not as good, so no-one will buy them.

Alternatively, get some lab tests done.

But as I said, a lot of these threads are really just for affirmation and emotional reassurance so a lab test on the lens wouldn't help.

 

[fisheye]

Order in court.

Case dismissed.

400 years hard labour for all witnesses.

Judge Dread.

 

[Brett DiMichele]

Jase,

You know the trouble with this sort of reply is that it's more disinformation
than information

I do agree that many times that psychology plays a part on how someone
responds to negativity. But when you have data that proves something
is a quality product and people still make negative claims then you do tend
to get preturbed.

There have been MTF Tests done.. And hundreds upon hundreds of
"user" reviews who say the lens is a top notch product. So when someone
comes along and says something to the effect of "Well, I feel that this
other lens is more sharp" when the data doesn't support it.. You have to
speak up.

I don't care what lens someone buys. If they want to stick with Canon L
glass or Canon non L glass or even Tamron glass I don't care. Each company
has numerous "great" lenses at numerous price points. But the Bigma IS
sharp at 500mm at 50' or 10' it doesn't matter.

And Daniella says the 100/300 Sigma she had was not sharp wide open. I
already posted results at every apeture at 300mm , 100mm and even 164
mm but never got a response....

I am going to do it again (different target) just because I have nothing
better to do. My intention is not to change someone's obvious opinion but
if I have fun doing it... Why not

As far as Sigma is concered.. They sell lenses for Canon EF, Nikon F, Sigma
SA, Pentax K, Minolta Maxxum and soon enough Olympus E-System. Sigma
gets larger with each new lens they develop and sell, and each new mount
they support. I don't have to be a fanboy they are doing a fantastic job
on their own without me promoting.. But I sure can clear up any incorrect
information when I see it.

Take care

--



I am not a Professional but I did stay at Holiday Inn!
Please take a look at my gallery!
http://www.westol.com/~brettd/sd10/gallery/
http://www.pbase.com/sigmasd9/brett_dimichele

 

[EyE]

Well, the statue is not that big, the ruler has metric system numbers written on it. So you have an idea how big it is.(do the conversion to your local system) Its a real ruler, The screws on it say a thousent words at that distance. If you want birds, im sure you can find lots and more lots of bigma birds on this forum.

If you try lets say a pigeon on top of a building..50 feet or more.

This statue is on top of a appartment building, talken from approx
100 meters. The image is not sharpend and is a conversion of a raw
image. watch the ruler. Perhaps you should not be this sceptic
about it and just try it out. Saying bigma is unscharp wide open
proves you have been misinformed about this product. In my opinion
it is one of the few lenses that is really sharp wie open. That
does not main that it is without flaws, but the ones you mention
are preciesly its strong points.

Try for exemple a pigeon on a wire at 500mm wide open..try
something 50 feet and see what you get.

http://users.pandora.be/eye_of_glass/50-500/0711.jpg

This is an unsharpend picture of a Sigma 50-500 at 500mm a 7.1 t
1/200 flash fired at 4 meter.

Just to silence all critics about this lens. Adding scharpening to
this picture is very hard. It already lookes overscharpend out of
the box. Picture is raw with camera sharpening -2. Im not trying to
show my talents as a fotographer with this picture but im pretty
sure that beating this kind of resolving power at this focal length
requires looods of cash...

Ps look at the spot of glucoom eyedeziese in the eye...

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

 

[EyE]

??? but the lenses you mention are top rated primes.One even has a stabilizer. Please compare apples with apples... You must compare the sigma with anouther zoom in that class...

most of us like you. ;-)

The thread itself holds some interest to me, as I have observed on
more than one occasion where a lens might yield seemingly excellent
close-up results, but fail to deliver on more distant shots... just
wondering if this isn't something indigenous to certain lenses, or
not.

Not quite shopping for the shoulder-fired rocket launcher sized
zooms, yet, but the Bigma holds a certain appeal to me when I do.
The point (I think) Daniella is/was trying to make is true enough
to me and my experience, though.. If I wanted to pass judgement on
a lens, I'd certainly want to see it challenged more than by a
closeup, and preferrably at a reasonable distance with smaller
targets AND with unretouched 100% crops (only way to see what
really was captured).

well, kind of obvious I was also interested in the Bigma but
got the 100-300 F4 because it was supposed to be sharper than the
Bigma. Unfortunatly I could not get the same level of detail from
it in my birds in flight that I had with both the 300mm F4 L and
the 300mm F4 L IS.

Now I have the 100-300 F5.6 L and it is not sharp wide open at
300mm but at F7 it is good. My main gripe about it is that it is
slow focusing.

So I might give the bigma a try to see.

I have no issue with her making this request, as it's exactly what
I'd want to see, too. But, I have no reason to lean one way or the
other on the Bigma vs. a Canon 100-400L as to which would resolve
better on finer objects at a distance. I haven't looked at enough
images from both to have an opinion on this, but I can see why
someone would want to see the types of shots she seems to be asking
for.

From what I have seen of the Bigma, it's another excellent
'off-brand' value that should be on the short list of anyone
shopping in this range of lens. Whether someone decides on one, or
not, is a personal choice. Me, I like values.. I don't always buy
them (got the Canon 100/2.8 instead of Tamron 90/2.8 SP), but I
always shop them before making a decision. I'm more immediately
interested in either a 200mm telephoto OR a 70-200 zoom (can't get
off the fence on this yet), but I have the Sigma 70-200/2.8 on the
short list if I go zoom. I wish I could just talk myself into
giving up on the zoom and taking a 200/2.8, pair it with my
100/2.8, add a 1.4x TC, and just declare the 70-100 range 'dead to
me'. =D

choices, choices.. fortunately, there's usually more than one good
choice to pick from. Oftentimes, at least one of them isn't a
Canon.

icmp

and then 14 mins later infer silence being for some nefarious
reason.. when only 14 mins transpired. As if forum is instant
messenger and someone needs to be sitting on the other end leaping
in with a quick response?

other than that, nothing.

they were very responsive ... until I posted my image. Perhaps
nobody likes me ... 8-(

--
Brian
Dallas, TX
Still love the Spurs (the Mavs suck)
10D owner and love sharp images.
http://www.pbase.com/drip

--
Minë Corma hostië të ilyë ar mordossë nutië të
Mornórëo Nóressë yassë i Fuini caitar.
Un thoron arart’a s’un hith mal’kemen ioke.
Saurulmaiel

 

[EyE]

hahaha, thats very funy Drip, atleast somebody has humor yet on these forums )

Could she be blinded by the sharpness and couldn't find the
keyboard to respond?
--
Brian
Dallas, TX
Still love the Spurs (the Mavs suck)
10D owner and love sharp images.
http://www.pbase.com/drip

 

[jase]

Nope, you just get perturbed because you are emotionally attached to it.

You are now wittering on about tests done on your lens without tests done on an equivalent lens because you would rather be right than objective. Quality and sharpness are for most people subjective. Lay down the criteria and measure equivalent lenses and leave out the anecdotes. If you say there are facts that back you up, provide them. Get the lab test results for the lens you are attached and get the same for the lenses you are comparing them with and let the facts speak rather than spouting anecdotes about lenses you own and lenses you don't.

I do agree that many times that psychology plays a part on how someone
responds to negativity. But when you have data that proves something
is a quality product and people still make negative claims then you
do tend
to get preturbed.

 

[Mark Marshall]

Here's what I noticed about your "sharp close but unsharp far" doctrine. You had good sharpness at distance with the 70-300 APO (non Canon, so obviously non L), The 300 f/4L and now the 100-300 f/5.6L. Not so much with all the other bigger faster zooms. You do not use a monopod in your bird photography correct? Why don't you just admit that the other lenses are too heavy for your girlie girl arms, and you are spent by the time you get them mounted and up to your eye? Tee hee, just kidding. ~ m²

This is an unsharpend picture of a Sigma 50-500 at 500mm a 7.1 t
1/200 flash fired at 4 meter.

Just to silence all critics about this lens. Adding scharpening to
this picture is very hard. It already lookes overscharpend out of
the box. Picture is raw with camera sharpening -2. Im not trying to
show my talents as a fotographer with this picture but im pretty
sure that beating this kind of resolving power at this focal length
requires looods of cash...

Ps look at the spot of glucoom eyedeziese in the eye...

--
Enjoy life - spend your clothing budget on lenses!
http://rhodeymark.instantlogic.com/PhotoGallery.ilx

 

[Mark Marshall]

Aside from photodo.com and photozone.de who has MTF databases? According to everything I have seen Brett is correct, "some" Sigma EX can indeed compete and win against "some" Canon L using objective, not subjective testing. ~ m²

You are now wittering on about tests done on your lens without
tests done on an equivalent lens because you would rather be right
than objective. Quality and sharpness are for most people
subjective. Lay down the criteria and measure equivalent lenses
and leave out the anecdotes. If you say there are facts that back
you up, provide them. Get the lab test results for the lens you
are attached and get the same for the lenses you are comparing them
with and let the facts speak rather than spouting anecdotes about
lenses you own and lenses you don't.

I do agree that many times that psychology plays a part on how someone
responds to negativity. But when you have data that proves something
is a quality product and people still make negative claims then you
do tend
to get preturbed.

--
Enjoy life - spend your clothing budget on lenses!
http://rhodeymark.instantlogic.com/PhotoGallery.ilx