The Bigma

rikki1q

rikki1q

Suspended / Banned
Messages
140
Name
Rik
Edit My Images
Yes
im seriously looking into getting a sigma 50-500mm fairly soon does anyone have any views on this lens good and bad and does any one have any example pictures they could post so i get an idea of image quality.

Thanks in advance

Rik
 
I find it quite good but very heavy for hand holding over long periods .... Needs good light or a tripod to bring out the best in it.

Will try and dig out some shots later
 
If you're a Canon user, the 100-400L completely blows it away in every dimension - build quality, image quality, focus speed, ergonomics, ...
 
StewartR said:
If you're a Canon user, the 100-400L completely blows it away in every dimension - build quality, image quality, focus speed, ergonomics, ...
Click to expand...


Camera bag says Nikon.
 
Hi rikki1q consider the Sigma 150-500mm if your not worried about the wider end. I did and am extremely happy with it. Also it has OS (optical stabiliser) which works very well imho.
These were taken with the lens, and are between 1/3rd and 1/2 of full frame. They were taken on a Canon 40D in av mode at 400iso.
1.
0542e.jpg

2.
0520e.jpg

3.
0516e.jpg

These have been sharpened slightly, but considering the crop i am more than happy. Oh and they were all hand held.
 
StewartR said:
If you're a Canon user, the 100-400L completely blows it away in every dimension - build quality, image quality, focus speed, ergonomics, ...
Click to expand...
Hehe... except maybe the fact that it's 500mm and the Canon you mention is 400mm eh... :):)
 
rikki1q said:
im seriously looking into getting a sigma 50-500mm fairly soon does anyone have any views on this lens good and bad and does any one have any example pictures they could post so i get an idea of image quality.

Thanks in advance

Rik
Click to expand...

Dont buy it. I hate it, if you have 1.4 and 2.8 lenses elsewhere in your collection, you will want to throw the bigma in front of a speeding train when you first use it.

It sucks in MY opinion. I am probably just angry as I am crap with it :D

Gary.
 
The examples above look ok but as is said a million and one times, web sized images hide a multitude of sins! That's not to say it might not be any good as I have no idea, but I personally would not buy any lens based on web sized shots taken with it.
 
My wife, Kirsty has one and the few times I have used it I have found it to be ok. Cant complain about the image quality and the build quality of the lens is ok too. I usually always shoot with Canon L glass and although its not up to the L standard it is none the less a very competent and useful lens.

I know its not everyones cup of tea but Kirsty uses it regularly and she seems to rate it quite highly.
 
Richard Peters said:
The examples above look ok but as is said a million and one times, web sized images hide a multitude of sins! That's not to say it might not be any good as I have no idea, but I personally would not buy any lens based on web sized shots taken with it.
Click to expand...
Good point Richard, but the Bigma is a more than capable lens.

Sure, you pays your money and all that so if you only pay 600'ish for such a large focal length lens, then you're not getting top quality glass, but for the money this lens does quite a remarkable job. I have had this pic printed at poster size and believe me it's 100% fine.

p76710766-2.jpg
 
I think it's an ok lens. No where near as sharp as other more expensive lenses.

I think it can be a GREAT lens for developing photographic skills, though it can be like jumping in at the deep end if you've not had long lenses before.
The slow aperture at 500mm and no IS forces you to learn immaculate long lens technique to get the best out of it.
 
Here's an old photo i've just dug out.

Was with the bigma + canon 350D

bigma.jpg
 
Werecow said:
I think it's an ok lens. No where near as sharp as other more expensive lenses.
Click to expand...
I agree - partly, because it can actually be pin sharp. If you get it right... you know, when the shot just well... works, it is an awesome lens, I mean awesome.

p76710766-4.jpg



Werecow said:
I think it can be a GREAT lens for developing photographic skills, though it can be like jumping in at the deep end if you've not had long lenses before.
Click to expand...

Agree with this, but then again, that is the market the lens is aimed at. Most people who do purchase the Bigma have not previously owned or used a lens with such a long focal length - therefore it is not like jumping in at the deep end... it is jumping in at the deep end. This is the exact market Sigma pitch to with the Bigma.

Werecow said:
The slow aperture at 500mm and no IS forces you to learn immaculate long lens technique to get the best out of it.
Click to expand...
No IS...?? you only get no IS if you have a Canon or Nikon fit Bigma.

IS isn't needed in the lens for several other manufacturers. Once again, a combination of the Bigma with in body IS camera, makes for an awsome rig.
 
I used one for many years for my bird photography. Images from it can look a little soft, but they do sharpen up well afterwards so it isn't too much of an issue. The slowish shutter speeds can be, given the lens is F6.3. I used to find myself shooting at speeds of 1/60 to 1/250 of a second and subject movement was a major issue. I lost far more pictures because the bird moved and blurred in the frame then for any other reason. I had mine pinched from the car earlier this year, and was gutted. Having said that I used the insurance money to buy a Canon 500mm L F4.5 lens and I now find I get far more keepers.
The lens is very capable, and reasonably sharp. It focuses closer than my canon too. The 150-500mm IS may be a better option if you feel IS would help, but other than that I would highly recommend the Bigma. For the price I don't think there is anything out there to touch it (including the Tamron)
 
I have loved owning mine , I am looking to trade mine up to the Canon 100 400 to get the IS, on an overcast morning I wont bother putting the lens on unless I am prepared to push the ISO up (which usually I am not)
 
You have to treat the Bigma for what it is - a very cheap way to get a reasonable 500mm lens without spending ££££

Other options for Nikon users would be the Nikon 80-400 or the Nikkor 300mm f/4 AF-S with a TC.

Personally I didn't really like it optically, compared to my Nikkor glass - even the 70-300 VR is better than the Bigma at 300mm, so you really need 400mm+ to make it worthwhile - otherwise just buy the MUCH better 300mm f/4 AF-S + TC.

Its a decent enough lens, and seems to outperform the newer 150-500 OS.
 
As with all Sigma lenses, it's a bit of a lottery wether you get a good sharp copy or not but if you buy 'locally' you shouldn't have any difficulty if yours turns out to be a bit off. Read some of the reviews over at fredmiranda.com, it gets an 8.9 rating which is pretty good.

As said above, it's VERY heavy and unless the light is excellent I'd recommend using at least a monopod for best results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top