Can you say BIGMA?

[khiemluu]

Hi all, just picked up a BIGMA after reading many a good review of this beast. Here are some thoughts of this bad boy.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/kluu/Miscellaneous/Bigma/f535eee9.jpg

----------------

I know that people often complain about its size and weight, but considering it's focal length of 500mm, its pretty darn good. In cloudy conditions a monopod is highly recommended. But i was able to capture this shot handheld in overcast conditions.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/kluu/Miscellaneous/Bigma/dc2cfb61.jpg

1/1000s, 500mm, f/5.6, ISO800

----------------

In full sunlight, that's where the BIGMA comes into it's own. The sun came out long enough for me to try and handhold a shot at a focal length of 266mm.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/kluu/Miscellaneous/Bigma/Bird-Feeder.jpg

1/500s, 266mm, f/5.6, ISO400

----------------

Here are a few pics of the BIGMA on a monopod at full tilt.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/kluu/Miscellaneous/Bigma/0bada27d.jpg

1/1600s, 500mm, f/5.6, ISO400

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v458/kluu/Miscellaneous/Bigma/701408fb.jpg

1/500s, 500mm, f/5.6, ISO200

----------------

All in all im very happy with the sharpness, even at 500mm, and it's built like a brick!

Will do more testing when the sun comes out again!

I'll be happy to answer any questions or do some testing for anyone who is thinking of buying this lens.

Khiem.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I agree.. when you consider it's focal range it isn't heavy.. the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS which is jsut a few ounces lighter.. THAT is heavy!

[khiemluu]

I agree.. when you consider it's focal range it isn't heavy.. the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS which is jsut a few ounces lighter.. THAT is heavy!

Yeah, it's really strange how people quote the size and weight as the lens' weakness.

Khiem.

[condyk]

Yeah, it's really strange how people quote the size and weight as the lens' weakness. Khiem.

Not so strange ... many people have read it's REPUTATION for being heavy and big but few have seen one or held one or used one in real world conditions. The good thing is that the balance and usability are excellent.

I noticed f5.6 throughout on your shots. Try it at f8 as I remember it really like it there.

[khiemluu]

Not so strange ... many people have read it's REPUTATION for being heavy and big but few have seen one or held one or used one in real world conditions. The good thing is that the balance and usability are excellent.

I noticed f5.6 throughout on your shots. Try it at f8 as I remember it really like it there.

Thanks for the tip, much appreciated, ive just been so excited, haven't even tried the different appeture settings. :D

I'll be going to the zoo in the next few weeks, so lots of experimenting there!

Khiem.

[csnudelman]

I agree.. when you consider it's focal range it isn't heavy.. the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS which is jsut a few ounces lighter.. THAT is heavy!

HAH? Just a few ounces lighter? Try a pound. And the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens is still a pound+ lighter than Bigma and a hell of a lot finer lens.

[condyk]

... the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens is still a pound+ lighter than Bigma and a hell of a lot finer lens.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah! So speaks the voice of an experienced user. Take heed people :rolleyes:

[csnudelman]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah! So speaks the voice of an experienced user. Take heed people :rolleyes:

Do you ever just disagree with someone without resorting to name calling and childish actions?

[CyberDyneSystems]

HAH? Just a few ounces lighter? Try a pound. And the Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS (Image Stabilizer) USM Autofocus Lens is still a pound+ lighter than Bigma and a hell of a lot finer lens.

1470 grams Vs. 1840
Your right.. closer to 12+ ounces.. for some reason I recalled them being closer.. like 10 ounces.

The 100-400mm is lighter than the 70-200mm IS.. that allways blew my mind. Afer lugging the Bigma and the 70-200mm all over the place.. the 100-400mm feels positively featherweight! :)

[CyberDyneSystems]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

Yeah! So speaks the voice of an experienced user. Take heed people :rolleyes:

You are definitely in the minority there...
There are quite a few experienced users that prefer the 100-400mm to the Bigma..

[LightRules]

You are definitely in the minority there...
There are quite a few experienced users that prefer the 100-400mm to the Bigma..

The 100-400L has a strong following, no doubt since it's a very fine lens. But the Bigma has a cult following as well. This was posted in 11/04 at DPR Canon Lens forum, and threads must end at 150 posts, and this was going real strong. Tons of Bigmatists around with amazing galleries (just as the 100-400L):

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=11116598

[Hellashot]

I have also just put in my order for the DG version.

[condyk]

Do you ever just disagree with someone without resorting to name calling and childish actions?

Have you used the Bigma tho' ... a few days ago you didn't know what it was. A bit naughty to say one thing is 'a hell of a lot better' than another without solid personal experience or something to back it up. But that's just my view and I may be wrong in it.

Nevertheless, let's put it all behind us kind sir :D

Before the assembled mass, I am sorry if you are at all offended. I apologise unreservedly. I don't think I called you a name, but I am sorry if you thought I did. I think twice I have been out of order here and both times to you. I am naughty at times but it is all in fun ... really, no need to take it to heart. I am quite harmless and quite nice :) I am also a Scouser and we are bred with a permanent wink on our cheek!! I don't think you have the equivelent in the US ...

CDS, I love the 100-400mm L myself. I like fairness and objectivity too. I was refering to the posters lack of use or knowedge of the Sigma. His point was made with such strong assertion, that anyone less informed reading it may think he had experience of it and thus be unduly influenced.

[Gadget-Guy]

Hi,
I have both the Canon 70-200 IS and the DG Bigma and the Bigma spends more time on the camera than the 70-200 IS, I mainly take pictures of motocross and at 5 Foot 10 and 9 stone in weight(Thats me not the Lens) i carry it round the track all day and hardly ever use a support of any kind as its just not practical.Ok i know that L series glass is great but the value for money of the Bigma and the focal range well it beats the 70-200 IS and the 100-400 by miles.

[GyRob]

I thought this lens was f6.3 at 500mm not f5.6 ?
Rob.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yes,. it's f/6.3
The Bigma and other lenses like it "lie" to the Camera to make it think it is an f/5.6 so AF will function.

[csnudelman]

Condky wrote,

"...a few days ago you didn't know what it was"

Not true, where did you get this from? A few days ago I asked about the "Bigma" but I have heard and read about it for sometime.

" A bit naughty to say one thing is 'a hell of a lot better' than another without solid personal experience or something to back it up."

There you go again, making things up. I admitted not having personal experience with the Sigma lens. I never said or felt I didn't have "something to back it up".

"I was refering to the posters lack of use or knowedge of the Sigma."

Gee, I don't know where you get this "lack of knowedge" crap. I guess if one does not agree with you they have "lack of knowedge". Again, while I have no first hand experience with the Sigma I certainly am informed.

"His point was made with such strong assertion, that anyone less informed reading it may think he had experience of it and thus be unduly influenced."

I never claimed to have personal experience with the Sigma. So, tell me, just how many people that use this forum do you consider "less informed"? 20%, 50%, 80%?

[cfcRebel]

Darn! I should have learned Photoshop! So that i can use a Star Wars poster, put a Bigma in Darth's hands, and 100-400L in Obi-Wan's hands fighting! :D Light coming out from the lens! Woah!

[condyk]

Sir, I quote:

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=81156

"I keep hearing about this lens. Just what is it? The 50-500mm Sigma? Why would someone want it and what about the image quality?"

:rolleyes:

For someone so well informed on this lens you've asked several very basic questions there. Maybe you just read up a lot over the last 3-4 days! :lol:

cfcRebel, I noticed you put the 100-400mm in Obi Wan's hand :lol: Still funny tho'!

No further comment from me on this issue ...

[CyberDyneSystems]

Darn! I should have learned Photoshop! So that i can use a Star Wars poster, put a Bigma in Darth's hands, and 100-400L in Obi-Wan's hands fighting! :D Light coming out from the lens! Woah!

"I see your Schwartz is even bigger than mine...." http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze2hdzu/pics/lsvader.gif

Hmmm.. maybe Vader gets the 100-400... it has the red line....

[khiemluu]

Wow such a furore! There will always be the Canon white lens purists, Sigma is just a very good value for money alternative for those that can't afford the "L" premium. There is not doubting that the "L" glass is optically superior, but most times the Sigma lenses will give you VERY close image quality for less than half the price of the Canon equivalent.

I don't doubt that the Canon 100-400 L IS is a fine lens, heck i definitely lusted over it before deciding on the Bigma.

But after comparing the pictures of the Canon to the Bigma i couldn't see justification for the difference in price...Canon $3500AUD Vs Bigma $1400AUD. Yes you do get IS, but with the great performance of the 20D at high ISO's the Sigma was definitely more BFYB for my needs.

And as for the weight, when did a few hundred grams ever kill anyone? :p.

Khiem.

[Muzz]

I love my BIGMA :)

And I should know about the Bigma (just like Condyk) as I now have his :D

Its a shame to see some Canon purists ("it aint white so must be s*ite) knocking the lens.

It does a stellar job and I for one am delighted with it and at the end of the day is all that matters :)

[csnudelman]

Does not have to be white. My 24-70L and 135L are both black.

[khiemluu]

Does not have to be white. My 24-70L and 135L are both black.

Sorry should have specified "L" series Canon Telephoto Zoom lenses are white for those that weren't aware. We should try and more specific with our comments as to not put anyone off side... :p

I must admit i was bit skeptical about the quality of the Sigma EX lenses at first, but with some light research i found them to be briliant performers for their price. The gap bewteen the quality of these lenses and their Canon equiv. does not equate to the price difference in my mind.

If you have the money, then by all means get the Canon's (I should know, i have some L glass too), but i wasn't going to fork out an extra $2k AUD for a lens, that for what i could see, did more than an adequate job.

So let's jus agree to disagree and not turn this into an us vs. them schoolyard battle. We are all here to enjoy photography and everyone has their own opinion and this should be respected.

Khiem.

[csnudelman]

So let's jus agree to disagree and not turn this into an us vs. them schoolyard battle. Khiem.

Who said they wanted to turn this into a schoolyard fight? Hah? Who? Must have been some Neo-Sigma user. I don't want a fight, no sir, not me. So just tell us who wants this fight. Did you get some personal emails from someone we don't know about? Hah? Did you? Well, did you? Hah? Hah? Hah? Well? Some people just have to act like big babies.

[condyk]

Did you get some personal emails from someone we don't know about? Hah? Did you? Well, did you? Hah? Hah? Hah? Well? Some people just have to act like big babies.

While there is no suggestion that I have sent email's to the gentleman, given any possible inferences that could be drawn by others I confirm that I did not send this gentleman any personal e-mails.

[cfcRebel]

Hah? Did you? Well, did you? Hah? Hah? Hah? Well? http://initial-d.com/forums/images/smilies/bowrofl.gif

[felix21685]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

man i wish i could have either of these lenses one day and here you guys are arguing about which ones better..well once you decide..ill take the lesser of the two ..:D

[khiemluu]

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

man i wish i could have either of these lenses one day and here you guys are arguing about which ones better..well once you decide..ill take the lesser of the two ..:D

Well a few days into my BIGMA and i love it, when you buy a BIGMA you know what you are getting into so there shouldn't be too suprised with it's characteristics.

Now if you will excuse me, i'm off to do 100 curls with my 20kg dumbells :p.

[Hellashot]

Who said they wanted to turn this into a schoolyard fight? Hah? Who? Must have been some Neo-Sigma user. I don't want a fight, no sir, not me. So just tell us who wants this fight. Did you get some personal emails from someone we don't know about? Hah? Did you? Well, did you? Hah? Hah? Hah? Well? Some people just have to act like big babies.

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

[csnudelman]

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

Went right over your head, didn't it?

[jfrancho]

Is the Canon 40% better than the Bigma? That is the price differential. I'm sure they're both fine lenses, but they seem to fill different shoes.

[csnudelman]

Is the Canon 40% better than the Bigma? That is the price differential. I'm sure they're both fine lenses, but they seem to fill different shoes.


40% in what way? In who's opinion? Maybe the advantages of one item over another is worth the additional cost to some even though the improvement may not be equal to the cost difference because the better product will do what it's user wants it to do. With others, who can't see or don't care about the differences, it would be a waste to spend more. If I can get a picture to come out a certain way that I want with one item but not the other how do I put a percentage on that? In fact, one may consider it 100% for that reason. If one is going to hand hold (for example) the better lens and another is shooting from a mono-pod with the inferior lens the latter may come out with better results anyway. Myself? I will never be able to afford the best of everything. I do, however, hope to get decent lenses, et when I do. I have 2 "L" lenses because with a streach I was able to buy them, they repersent 95% of my shooting needs, and I hope to have them a long time.

[jfrancho]

40% in what way?That is the question, chief. In who's opinion?Yours, or anyone else that has one, tough guy.Maybe the advantages of one item over another is worth the additional cost to some even though the improvement may not be equal to the cost difference because the better product will do what it's user wants it to do. With others, who can't see or don't care about the differences, it would be a waste to spend more. If I can get a picture to come out a certain way that I want with one item but not the other how do I put a percentage on that? In fact, one may consider it 100% for that reason. If one is going to hand hold (for example) the better lens and another is shooting from a mono-pod with the inferior lens the latter may come out with better results anyway. Myself? I will never be able to afford the best of everything. I do, however, hope to get decent lenses, et when I do. I have 2 "L" lenses because with a streach I was able to buy them, they repersent 95% of my shooting needs, and I hope to have them a long time.Well there you go, you gave me the answer, sparky.

Just a note, your diction, though you may not realize it, is adversarial, and can cause some controversy. I personally don't care, since we are both probably card carrying charter members of the Jerk of the Month Club, but others may not appreciate it.

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'd love to go head to head to see which of us the larger jerk of the month... but I wouldn't want any of you to loose your amateur status.. :lol:

I see this thread has run it's legitimate course.