Need Help

[morenoar]

I just purchased the Sigman 50-500mm lens and don't know if the pictures I am taking are as sharp as the Canon 100-400 IS lens. Does anyone have comments, positive or negative, about the 50-500 lens. I just started learning to use a Digital Camera (Canon 300d). Well, I just decidec to learn how to take pictures, without the "just point and shoot" method. I am new to this forum and don't know how to submit samples. Please help

[robertwgross]

The method for posting an image is explained in the Help at the top of this page. Look for Embed Image. You must have some web space for the image.

---Bob Gross---

[morenoar]

this is what I have attempted to do with my camera


http://home.earthlink.net/~morenoar/


all comments or help would be appreciated

[LazyPhotographer]

I've had the Sigma lens for about a week now... and have not yet been able to get a crisp picture, even using a tripod. Nothing is really sharp - even the colours are flat. It's going back and I'll upgrade to the Canon.

Lesson learned.

[defordphoto]

morenoar wrote:
this is what I have attempted to do with my camera

http://home.earthlink.net/~morenoar/

all comments or help would be appreciated


I noticed on your page that you state you have no experience in photography. My first guess would be that these photos were not post-processed? What mode were they shot in? RAW? JPEG? Large-fine?

It looks to me like these photos need some white-balance help and some USM to perk them up a bit.

[scottbergerphoto]

Here are examples of what the Canon 100-400 IS L can do:
http://www.pbase.com/scottbergerphoto/faces_in_the_park
It's a great lens once you get used to the weight and the push-pull zoom.
Scott

[defordphoto]

And here's my 100-400L IS gallery contribution.

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/2003/CART/Portland/3_Day/index.htm

[iwatkins]

morenoar,

I've had a good look at your pictures and I would say that the lens looks OK to me.

Both images (according to your data) were shot at ISO1600. This is going to give some noise in the image that will soften it slightly. I think use of Unsharpen Mask in your images would help (if you haven't already) as RFMSports also points out.

Also consider using a tripod or support of some kind when shooting with this lens even if you do have a high shutter speed.

Anyway, I hope all the above helps and that the lens isn't a lemon as I picked up my Sigma 50-500 today. :)

Cheers

Ian

[robertwgross]

Color noise tends to be high when the ISO setting is very high. If you are stuck with that, then you can post process the image file with Neat Image, and that can get rid of a lot of the problem. On the other hand, it is not perfect.

Unsharp Mask is an excellent tool. Unfortunately for me, it took me quite a while to learn how to use it effectively. There is a tendency for a beginner to over-do it.

There is a famous nature photographer by the name of John Shaw, and I have some of his books. He claims that more than 99% of all of his photography is done from a tripod. Prior to 2002, my tripod percentage was probably 10%. By the end of 2002, my tripod percentage was probably 60%. Now it varies from 60 to 80%, and the finished quality of my work has improved accordingly.

Most of the tripod advice that you will read here will point you toward a very good tripod, very expensive, very heavy. That is a good solution for serious photographers. On the other hand, for a beginner, you need something in a tripod that won't break the bank. Since I do nature photography and have to carry my stuff around a lot, I found that a lighter/cheaper tripod is my solution. Interestingly, I use a Sunpack model with quick release mounts, and it weighs slightly less than 3.5 pounds, and it cost only $40.

---Bob Gross---

[iwatkins]

As Bob says and advice you will hear very often, a cheap tripod is better than no tripod at all.

Even if you do have to buy a cheap one, weigh it down if you can by hanging your camera bag/small child/roadkill over it to keep it steady if it is windy etc. The alternative is to get/make a rock bag. This consists of a bag that attaches inside each of the three legs and hangs down. You simply fill it full of rocks on location.

I had to use this solution several years ago (in my film days) when up the Cairngorms. I had a heavy tripod anyway but I had three of my walking/climbing buddies lying down hanging on one leg each as it was blowing at a steady 60 knots with gusts around 110 knots. But it was worth it, got some great images. :)

Cheers

Ian

[robertwgross]

Ian's suggestion about weighting a tripod is good. I carry my tripod around in a nylon bag with a shoulder strap. I don't really want to fill the bag up with rocks to use as a weight. I would rather keep the inside clean. However, I have a monster lens that is transported in a monster lens case. When I am using the normal lenses, I can use the monster lens as ballast. On the bottom of the center pole of my tripod, there is a place to attach ballast.

Highly recommended when you get to the Cairngorms. The weather there can be a bit... brisk.

I was on a photo workshop in Death Valley National Park, out in the middle of the salt flats. Suddenly a dramatic sky appeared, and it was photogenic. So, I sat down flat on the ground with my back against my car (as a wind stop). I set the tripod down low to about 20 inches, with my film camera on it, and I started snapping away despite the gusty wind.

In contrast, the workshop instructor had an 8x10 view camera (how do you spell "big"?) on a big wooden tripod at eye level. The wind gusts were so bad that he simply could not shoot anything. He tried to shoot one or two, and they were ruined instantly due to wind vibration. Let's see, and the price of 8x10 color film is several dollars per frame.

So, a certain amount of tripod can be a huge asset.

---Bob Gross---

[scottbergerphoto]

RFMSports wrote:
And here's my 100-400L IS gallery contribution.

http://racefamily.racinglines.com/Galleries/2003/CART/Portland/3_Day/index.htm
Beautiful shots RFM. Practicing with that lens(especially hand holding) definitely helps.
Just a note on tripods. Good ones are expensive but don't need to be heavy. Carbon Fibre tripods like the Gitzo Mountaineer are stable, sturdy and light. Inexpensive tripods turn out not to be so inexpensive, as they wind up sitting in a corner after the first few outings of waiting for the tripod to stop vibrating. Then you buy a good one.
Scott

[robertwgross]

Carbon Fibre tripods are hugely expensive. If you can treat them normally, they will last. Unfortunately, if you provide enough impact force, the composite material will shatter much worse than a cheaper aluminum tripod. Most of us don't treat our tripods that badly, but it can happen.

---Bob Gross---

[scottbergerphoto]

robertwgross wrote:
Carbon Fibre tripods are hugely expensive. If you can treat them normally, they will last. Unfortunately, if you provide enough impact force, the composite material will shatter much worse than a cheaper aluminum tripod. Most of us don't treat our tripods that badly, but it can happen.

---Bob Gross---
I take my Gitzo all over the place. I carry it all over NYC subways. It is really light and compact (4 sections). I try to treat all my camera equipment with respect. Gitzo sells a padded case if knocking it around concerns you. I recommend the padded leggings for the tripod legs.
Scott

[danphoto1]

I agree the 50 500 is a great lens but you do need to use a tripod. The 100 to 100 is image stabilized and will get you a sharper image. I own both and I prefer the 100-400 even with the 1.4 extender on it it works great on my 1D for sports action. I just dont get the same crispnesss with to 50 to 500. the sigma needs a tripod under it.

http://www.dotphoto.com/MemViewImage.asp?AID=866833&IID=26401158

shot with the canon from the grown with the exteder hand held


http://www.dotphoto.com/MemViewImage.asp?AID=866833&IID=26396679

shot with the 50-500 hand held this shot is much softer than the first




Dan

[Jim_T]

danphoto1 wrote:

http://www.dotphoto.com/MemViewImage.asp?AID=866833&IID=26401158

http://www.dotphoto.com/MemViewImage.asp?AID=866833&IID=26396679



Can't see the pics.. These links require that you log in.... Could you post them on an open public site.. I'm interested in seeing them.

[morenoar]

Well, after taking over 70 pictures on the soccer fields, and comparing some of the pictures here on a 100-400 lens, time to take my Sigma back. Taking my pictures in Automatic or manual mode. Changing the Focus metering, doing Autofocus or manual focus. There is a HUGE difference in pictures. I used a Monopod to help me balance the 300D with the Sigma 50-500mm, and I don't like the pictures. Not as crisp as the pictures with the Canon lens. Love the 500mm capability, but I don't want to give up Sharpness for Depth. I would rather move around the field and get SHARP Pictures. This way, I can at least sell the pictures to the parents for a few dollars. Thanks for all of your inputs.