Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies. Read More.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
Thread started 14 Jan 2006 (Saturday) 10:52
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 DG - Bigma

 
cdifoto
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 10:52 |  #1

I don't know if this topic is particularly useful, but for some reason it seemed like a good idea at the time I thought of doing it. I'm showing 2 images of pretty much the same scene. Not on a tripod so I may have gotten a little lopsided with one or the other. I did take them consecutively and in the same spot however. One is wide open (f/6.3) @ 500mm (first one), and wide open (f/4) @ 50mm (second one). My in camera contrast is set to 0 on the Rebel XT, as is my sharpness. As a result, both images were resized as shown and 65%, 1, 1 USM was applied & I also used auto-contrast in Photoshop 7.0. It doesn't show raw sharpness of the lens, but it does display what it can do wide open, handheld and *cleaned up*. It also shows the difference between 50mm and 500mm for those wondering what 500mm (actual 465mm I've heard) would get them as far as reach is concerned.

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …0/nftn/2006-01-14-013.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …0/nftn/2006-01-14-014.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


I hope this thread helps at least someone.

Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
GS ­ Rider
Member
Avatar
242 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Kent, England
     
Jan 14, 2006 10:54 |  #2

thanks for that - it gives a 'real world' feel for the reach of the lens.


www.monkeypix.co.uk (external link)
Canon 5D
Canon 20D
17-85MM IS USM
Canon 50MM F1.4 USM
70-200MM f4L
100-400 f4.5-5.6 L USM IS
SIGMA 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG MACRO
Speedlite 580EX
Slik Pro 700
Lowepro Dryzone 200
Sony HDR-HC1
Pentax WPi

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Jan 14, 2006 11:12 |  #3

Nice one ...imagine that vehicle was a bird and we can now appreciate what length contributes. Of course, if it was a bird we'd all **** ourselves and run :lol: :lol:

BTW, not sure about this new rumour about 500mm not being 500mm! I certainly found the extra on the Bigma I had was missed when using the 100-400 IS L in the field. Whatever the case, - or + a few mm's, you do notice when it's not there.


http://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 11:38 as a reply to  @ condyk's post |  #4

condyk wrote:
Nice one ...imagine that vehicle was a bird and we can now appreciate what length contributes. Of course, if it was a bird we'd all **** ourselves and run :lol: :lol:

BTW, not sure about this new rumour about 500mm not being 500mm! I certainly found the extra on the Bigma I had was missed when using the 100-400 IS L in the field. Whatever the case, - or + a few mm's, you do notice when it's not there.

That gave me an idea. I went outside and did a *proper* reshoot...MLU, tripod, remote, etc. Wide open aperture, auto contrast, USM same as above. This is more of a focal length demo than anything...showing 400mm versus 500mm.

50mm:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …0/nftn/2006-01-14-001.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


400mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …0/nftn/2006-01-14-002.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


500mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …0/nftn/2006-01-14-003.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tommykjensen
Cream of the Crop
20,886 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark.
     
Jan 14, 2006 11:53 |  #5

I haven't really considered the Bigma even though I do want a longer lens than my 300 f/4L IS.

But if I were considering buying this instead of the 400 f/5.6L to get more reach I would not choose the Bigma. I don't think the extra length between 400 and 500 is enough. There is nothing wrong with the quality though.


EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
condyk
Africa's #1 Tour Guide
Avatar
20,886 posts
Likes: 17
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Birmingham, UK
     
Jan 14, 2006 11:53 |  #6

Good job ... now if you were a wildlife shooter primarily, like me, then this would be significant some of the time. You can manage great with the 400mm and 420mm/Tcon'd combo's most of the time tho'. What's very clear from this contribution too is that the 50mm 1.8 isn't going to be a good wildlife lens much of the time :-)


http://photography-on-the.net …/showthread.php​?t=1203740

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 12:04 as a reply to  @ tommykjensen's post |  #7

tommykjensen wrote:
I haven't really considered the Bigma even though I do want a longer lens than my 300 f/4L IS.

But if I were considering buying this instead of the 400 f/5.6L to get more reach I would not choose the Bigma. I don't think the extra length between 400 and 500 is enough. There is nothing wrong with the quality though.

A prime almost always trumps a zoom, especially with an extra stop of speed...I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I do believe it's an excellent contender with the 100-400L...

I'm not a fan of primes though...but I will make exceptions when I need to. Because of that and the extra 100mm, which I consider significant, I would choose Bigma. If I needed something really long and really fast, I'd shell out the cash for a 500 f/4 or something.


Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tommykjensen
Cream of the Crop
20,886 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2004
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark.
     
Jan 14, 2006 12:10 as a reply to  @ cdifoto's post |  #8

cdi-ink.com wrote:
A prime almost always trumps a zoom, especially with an extra stop of speed...I agree with you wholeheartedly. However, I do believe it's an excellent contender with the 100-400L...

I'm not a fan of primes though...but I will make exceptions when I need to.

I used the 400 prime as an example on purpose because if my choice was between the 100-400L and the Bigma I would choose the 100-400L for the IS. But then again I have tried the 100-400L before and do not like the push/pull zoom which is why I prefer the 400 prime.

My point was just that I don't think the extra 100 mm is very apparent and there for that extra length would not have any weight in my decision.

condyk is probably right that once You have had the 500 mm and go down You will notice it more.


EDITING OF MY PHOTOS IS NOT ALLOWED

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 12:14 as a reply to  @ tommykjensen's post |  #9

tommykjensen wrote:
I used the 400 prime as an example on purpose because if my choice was between the 100-400L and the Bigma I would choose the 100-400L for the IS. But then again I have tried the 100-400L before and do not like the push/pull zoom which is why I prefer the 400 prime.

My point was just that I don't think the extra 100 mm is very apparent and there for that extra length would not have any weight in my decision.

condyk is probably right that once You have had the 500 mm and go down You will notice it more.

Yeah...it's like spot metering. I don't have it and therefore don't miss it. I'm sure if I had had it before, I wouldn't buy a new camera without it. Same with the XT and only one dial....I never owned a SLR (be it digital or film) before, so I don't miss the thumb dial...the shift button is fine for me.

As for the IS, the lens is heavy enough to balance itself out if you use decent technique (assuming you aren't shaky by nature)...in post #1, that 500mm shot was at 1/160th.


Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Calzinger
Goldmember
Avatar
1,798 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: New York
     
Jan 14, 2006 13:44 |  #10

I'd hate to bother you, but would it be possible if you could take shots at more focal lengths? ie. 200mm VS 300mm for those in debate over the 70-300mm IS or the 70-200 f/4L, one of which is me.
Thanks!


"That building in the background is distracting."
"Oh OK, I'll move it out of the way next time."
internet forum fail

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 14:10 as a reply to  @ Calzinger's post |  #11

Calzinger wrote:
I'd hate to bother you, but would it be possible if you could take shots at more focal lengths? ie. 200mm VS 300mm for those in debate over the 70-300mm IS or the 70-200 f/4L, one of which is me.
Thanks!

No problem. Keep in mind this is a different lens altogether, so focal length should be your only consideration. I got as close as I could to the focal lengths (noted accordingly). :p

50mm:

PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-015.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


116mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-016.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


191mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-017.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


313mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-018.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


417mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-019.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO


500mm:
PHOTOBUCKET EMBEDDING IS DISABLED BY THIS MEMBER.
Photobucket sends ads instead of embedding photos from their free galleries.
Click the link (if available) below to see the image in a gallery page.

http://i17.photobucket​.com …/bigma/2006-01-14-020.jpg (external link)
HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'image/gif' | Byte size: ZERO

Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Calzinger
Goldmember
Avatar
1,798 posts
Joined Jan 2006
Location: New York
     
Jan 14, 2006 14:55 |  #12

Thanks! Greatly appreciated!
But now i'm really wondering if 200mm reach is enough, seems like the 300mm shot is much further out. Then again, I guess it does depend on how far the object your shooting is that affects your perception.
Thanks again! :D


"That building in the background is distracting."
"Oh OK, I'll move it out of the way next time."
internet forum fail

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blue_max
Goldmember
Avatar
2,622 posts
Joined Mar 2005
Location: London UK
     
Jan 14, 2006 15:02 as a reply to  @ Calzinger's post |  #13

Calzinger wrote:
Thanks! Greatly appreciated!
But now i'm really wondering if 200mm reach is enough, seems like the 300mm shot is much further out. Then again, I guess it does depend on how far the object your shooting is that affects your perception.
Thanks again! :D


That's exactly right. I used a 70-200 (at 200) and a 135mm prime and at short to medium distance, the difference was barely worth noticing. It was key to my selling my 70-200.

The pictures do seem very impressive though.

Graham


.
Lamb dressed as mutton.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
cdifoto
THREAD ­ STARTER
Don't get pissy with me
Avatar
34,039 posts
Likes: 12
Joined Dec 2005
     
Jan 14, 2006 15:19 as a reply to  @ blue_max's post |  #14

blue_max wrote:
That's exactly right. I used a 70-200 (at 200) and a 135mm prime and at short to medium distance, the difference was barely worth noticing. It was key to my selling my 70-200.

The pictures do seem very impressive though.

Graham

I actually bought my 70-200 f/2.8L AFTER Bigma...a long while after actually. I agree that it is ridiculously short, but I needed something with versatility and speed. It's an awesome lens for situations Bigma can't touch. I won't be selling either lens anytime soon. I will add longer stuff if I feel the need though....500 f/4 for example...but I don't foresee it anytime soon. I'm covered very nicely from 24mm-500mm, and hopefully before summer I'll add the Tokina 12-24 to go wide better than the kit lens does.


Did you lose Digital Photo Professional (DPP)? Get it here (external link). Cursing at your worse-than-a-map reflector? Check out this vid! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
GyRob
Cream of the Crop
9,966 posts
Likes: 404
Joined Feb 2005
Location: N.E.LINCOLNSHIRE UK.
     
Jan 14, 2006 16:33 |  #15

Looking at those shots you have a lot of scratches on your censor ;)
looks to me like you have a great lens there those shots are very sharp and a good job of showing lenths.
Rob.


"The LensMaster Gimbal"
http://www.lensmaster.​co.uk/rh1.htm (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

113,365 views & 0 likes for this thread
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 DG - Bigma
FORUMS Sample Photo Archives Lens Sample Photo Archive 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.0forum software
version 2.0 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is mason.snipes
696 guests, 431 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.