My Sigma-lens....

[vvizard]

... is definetly going to be well kept, and not sold or sent back to B&H =)

Wow, look at the sharpness of this motorcycle, captured at probably 100-160mph:

(cropped and scaled)
http://www.127001.org/div_pics/canon_forum/sigma-test.jpg

100% crop
http://www.127001.org/div_pics/canon_forum/sigma-test_100.jpg

These are straight from the camera, no USM or nothing applied.

EDIT:

1/500s
f/5.0
ISO 400

[slejhamer]

Which lens? :wink:

[vvizard]

Oh, hehe, should have told =D The 70-200mm f/2.8 EX

[c0ntr0lz]

man yall are ripping me apart with this lenses
and i don't even have the camera yet

great pix!!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

[Wickedfn4u]

Just put the money down on my Sigma, 120-300mm. I have that lens also and reallyREALLY like it.

What camera are you using too?

PS Nice shots!

Cheers
TC

[ShutteringFocus]

ahhhh...I want I want...I neeeeeeeeeed :shock:

Grrr...money trickles slow when you are saving for college! :cry:

[vvizard]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

Sold or broken?

[vvizard]

Just put the money down on my Sigma, 120-300mm. I have that lens also and reallyREALLY like it.

What camera are you using too?

PS Nice shots!

Cheers
TC

Using it on a 10D

[Canuck]

Just put the money down on my Sigma, 120-300mm. I have that lens also and reallyREALLY like it.

What camera are you using too?

PS Nice shots!

Cheers
TC

Using it on a 10D

Ja, I agree the 120-300 F2.8EX rocks!

[CyberDyneSystems]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

Sold or broken?

Sold when I got the Canon IS 70-200 at a really good price... but the Sigma was so much lighter.. and easier to use. And it isn't WHITE!

(i know I'm asking for trouble here.. but I REALLY don't like a bright white lens. It seems to defeat the purpose of a black camera. :)

[vvizard]

Wow, I totally agree on that white/black thing. I just haven't dared to speak it out that clearaly before, at the risk of getting banned from the forum, hunted down and beaten to death :-P

Shall we form the "black lenses for black cameras" club? :lol:

[CyberDyneSystems]

I was actually bidding on a Canon 200mm f/1.8 L... a discountinued "legendary" peice of Canon glass that people might actually "kill" for... one in mint condition sells for mor ethan they did new...

Well the one I was bidding was in total crap condition.. (the glass was okay with a little mold and stuff) but the outside looked like it had been through a war. Huge amounts of paint missing down to the metal.. none fo the rubber was left on it.. (focus rings etc.)

I was going to buy it (cheap = $1,000.00 in this case) ...and...


...you guessed t! Paint it BLACK!

(I figured it could nt loose any more valure re: cosmetics! )

Anyway.. I lost the bid. :)

[vvizard]

Yeah, I've been told about that lens from a photographer I know. The DOF @ 200mm and f1.8 on that beast is quite insane I was told =D

[Tom W]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

Sold or broken?

Sold when I got the Canon IS 70-200 at a really good price... but the Sigma was so much lighter.. and easier to use. And it isn't WHITE!

(i know I'm asking for trouble here.. but I REALLY don't like a bright white lens. It seems to defeat the purpose of a black camera. :)

And its still working just fine! Mr. Mallard looks pretty good through that Sigma 70-200 plus Ian's old 1.4X TC. Plus, this is a crop!

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=3759130

[vvizard]

How would you rate the quality of the 1.4x TC on this lens? I've been curious about whether to buy a 1.4x or 2.0x for it or not. I really need the extra focal-length sometimes, but won't fork over the cash if the result is crap :( And it's hard to tell from the small size of the picture you posted.

[Tom W]

How would you rate the quality of the 1.4x TC on this lens? I've been curious about whether to buy a 1.4x or 2.0x for it or not. I really need the extra focal-length sometimes, but won't fork over the cash if the result is crap :( And it's hard to tell from the small size of the picture you posted.

I like the 1.4 - I don't think that the 2.0 is as sharp, but I don't seem to lose much at all with the 1.4. BTW, its the Sigma 1.4 EX.

[Tom W]

Here's a 100% crop of the moon, shot with the 70-200 EX and the 1.4 EX telecon:

http://images.fotopic.net/?id=3598371

**Note that you have to click on the image to get the actual size (1084X724).**

Shot at 1/250, f/8 (total aperture including TC - it does report correctly), ISO 400.

[vvizard]

EDIT: My picture is in the first post of this thread. The image below is just a link from dragracing.se, where the picture and the text above it stood..


Wow, I read an article from the dragrace I shot this picture in. And to sumurize. This shot was probably the sharpest of all I got of cars/bikes in motion on the strip. Then this information was incredible cool to read:


"Nils Ole Lund made one test pass with the Excalibur Top Fuel Bike ."

http://www.dragracing.se/images/springnats04/nils-ole_lund.jpg


Heck, it was a TopFueler, the fastest of all the vehiceles on that strip that day, yet the sharpest one :shock:

So I googled up information about this Excalibur-bike, to see how fast it really is:

1/4 mile : 6.82 / 318 kmt
1/8 mile : 4.55
Best 60 fot : 1.12

source: http://rdbk.no/Documents/heh/medlemmer/nils.ole.lund/index.htm

Didn't notice the speed of this bastard (like any of the other) cause I was to busy shooting, but it was fun that the fastest of them all also got to be my sharpest :) Knew it was fast, but not _THIS_ fast :)

[sp00g3]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

Sold or broken?

Sold when I got the Canon IS 70-200 at a really good price... but the Sigma was so much lighter.. and easier to use. And it isn't WHITE!

(i know I'm asking for trouble here.. but I REALLY don't like a bright white lens. It seems to defeat the purpose of a black camera. :)

Not sure if any of you have a Sigma 70 - 200mm F2.8 on a DigiRebel, But Irecently noticed a slight Front Focusing problem. (Took some shots of a ruler) this only occured at f2.8 - f4, Everything else was tack sharp. has anybody else with this Config noticed this? Should I be concerned and send the lense in for some repair?

[RbnDave]

vvizard,

I use my sigma 70-200 with a 2x teleconverter. I've had mixxed results so far.

The autofocus is still quick, but it misses focus by a few inches. Manual focus is difficult because the view finder is kind of dark.

I still have some luck with this lens combo.

here are some examples for you.
http://www.pbase.com/image/27661006
http://www.pbase.com/image/27783926
http://www.pbase.com/image/27783930
http://www.pbase.com/image/27846216
http://www.pbase.com/image/27846240
http://www.pbase.com/image/25928473
http://www.pbase.com/image/23991521
http://www.pbase.com/image/25923206
http://www.pbase.com/image/25558336
http://www.pbase.com/image/24139082
http://www.pbase.com/image/27795287
http://www.pbase.com/image/27795125
http://www.pbase.com/image/27795095
http://www.pbase.com/image/28636677

All the above images were post processed. When I use the 2x tele, I have to do a lot of sharpening, add a lot of contrast, and add saturation. If there's a lot of light and I use a tripod I can get good results. If the light is anything less than perfect, this combo doesn't work very well.

I would still recomend the 2x tele if it's your only way to reach 400mm. For $150 it really adds to the range of your lens.

Dave

[vvizard]

Looking GOOD!

I miss my Sigma 70-200mm :(

Sold or broken?

Sold when I got the Canon IS 70-200 at a really good price... but the Sigma was so much lighter.. and easier to use. And it isn't WHITE!

(i know I'm asking for trouble here.. but I REALLY don't like a bright white lens. It seems to defeat the purpose of a black camera. :)

Not sure if any of you have a Sigma 70 - 200mm F2.8 on a DigiRebel, But Irecently noticed a slight Front Focusing problem. (Took some shots of a ruler) this only occured at f2.8 - f4, Everything else was tack sharp. has anybody else with this Config noticed this? Should I be concerned and send the lense in for some repair?

I found the same on mine when I shot a ruler. Altough I did that with a polarizer, and was told that the test then could not be trusted. I was about too shoot another one, but couldn't that next day as I was out to shoot the dragrace-event you see pictures of in this thread. After reviewing the pictures from the event I thought: "As long as the cars I shoot as these events are tack sharp, do I then really care if a ruler shot at 2m is not?" Nope, really, I don't care, so I never did that second ruler-shot :)

[vvizard]

vvizard,

I use my sigma 70-200 with a 2x teleconverter. I've had mixxed results so far.

The autofocus is still quick, but it misses focus by a few inches. Manual focus is difficult because the view finder is kind of dark.

<SNIP>

All the above images were post processed. When I use the 2x tele, I have to do a lot of sharpening, add a lot of contrast, and add saturation. If there's a lot of light and I use a tripod I can get good results. If the light is anything less than perfect, this combo doesn't work very well.

I would still recomend the 2x tele if it's your only way to reach 400mm. For $150 it really adds to the range of your lens.

Dave

Thanks for the sample-pictures. I don't care too much if it throw out focus by some inches. Using it for cars in motion, and set apertures fast enough not to care about a few inches. I'm really considering this, but doesn't know whether to go for this or the 1.4x yet.