If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Bill H. wrote: Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG No idea what all the Di, LD, (IF), APO, DG means but I wouldn't buy either one - a low f-stop of 5.6 - that is really crappy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Bill H. wrote: Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG No idea what all the Di, LD, (IF), APO, DG means but I wouldn't buy either one - a low f-stop of 5.6 - that is really crappy. Equipment is always a compromise. Sure, for quality everyone would love F2.8 or lower, but for many the cost is a significant factor, and the Sigma and Tamron lenses cover the range for a lot less cash. Even for those with the cash, the weight of a great big piece of glass can limit it's usefulness. I don't have either of these lenses. I looked at them and ultimately decided to get the Sigma F5.6 400 instead of a zoom because it reviewed a bit better in image quality and the flexibility of a zoom at that range wasn't critical to me. I've been happy with that lens, even using it with a 2X teleconverter and getting images I have been happy to have (though probably not publication quality). The only real pitfall in these compromise lenses is that autofocus is marginal. I actually find autofocus more of a nuisance than a help with my 400 anyway. I use it mainly shooting birds and animals, and because of the amount of travel in the focussing ring my camera (Nikon F80) takes a long time to refocus when the subject moves, so I can more easily stay focussed manually. -- Warren Montgomery ) http://home.att.net/~wamontgomery "Cisco Kid" wrote in message oups.com... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Bill H. wrote:
Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG Another Bill H. ... this could get real confusing fast ... Anyway, I think on an earlier post you mentioned having a Canon consumer-grade digital SLR body (as opposed to the 1D series pro bodies that will AF at f/8) ... if I got that right then your camera will hold autofocus at f/5.6 and wider apertures, so with these variable aperture zooms you might find that once you zoom out to 300 mm and beyond (or where ever the lens stops down from f/5.6) that you can no longer autofocus. To me this would be a deal-killer and I'd look for something no slower than f/5.6. Couple of other comments ... the AF is likely to be very slow with either of these compared to Canon's USM lenses ... the build quality is suspect in several models of the Sigma line (dunno about the specific one you mention) and there seems to be a lot of variation from lens to lens, indicating weak quality control. So if you get one I suggest buying from a vendor that will let you exchange it within the first two weeks (like B&H), then copy off Roger Clark's test pattern (or similar) and shoot test shots as soon as you get it. If you like it, fine ... if it's terrible then ask for another one. On the bright side, if you get a solidly constructed one you can do some real damage with it ... here are some shots a guy I know took in Africa last summer (I had given him some tips after he saw my Africa safari pics from last January) ... he was using one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm (maybe 100-500 or 50-500 or 170-500 if they make that one, I really can't remember but I can ask him). I think he had one of the Minolta digital bodies ... anyway, check the animals - birds (small and large), antelopes and cats and you'll see some really fine images. http://cjsmall.home.comcast.net/Tanzania/index.html Bill (the other Bill H. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Hi Bill Hilton,
Canon AF tends to work all the way down to f9 without too much trouble. I know from personal experience with an EOS 30 and an EOS 30D, both using a Tamron 28-300 and a Sigma 50-500 with a 1.4x converter in each case. Cheers -- "Bill Hilton" wrote in message oups.com... Bill H. wrote: Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG Another Bill H. ... this could get real confusing fast ... Anyway, I think on an earlier post you mentioned having a Canon consumer-grade digital SLR body (as opposed to the 1D series pro bodies that will AF at f/8) ... if I got that right then your camera will hold autofocus at f/5.6 and wider apertures, so with these variable aperture zooms you might find that once you zoom out to 300 mm and beyond (or where ever the lens stops down from f/5.6) that you can no longer autofocus. To me this would be a deal-killer and I'd look for something no slower than f/5.6. Couple of other comments ... the AF is likely to be very slow with either of these compared to Canon's USM lenses ... the build quality is suspect in several models of the Sigma line (dunno about the specific one you mention) and there seems to be a lot of variation from lens to lens, indicating weak quality control. So if you get one I suggest buying from a vendor that will let you exchange it within the first two weeks (like B&H), then copy off Roger Clark's test pattern (or similar) and shoot test shots as soon as you get it. If you like it, fine ... if it's terrible then ask for another one. On the bright side, if you get a solidly constructed one you can do some real damage with it ... here are some shots a guy I know took in Africa last summer (I had given him some tips after he saw my Africa safari pics from last January) ... he was using one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm (maybe 100-500 or 50-500 or 170-500 if they make that one, I really can't remember but I can ask him). I think he had one of the Minolta digital bodies ... anyway, check the animals - birds (small and large), antelopes and cats and you'll see some really fine images. http://cjsmall.home.comcast.net/Tanzania/index.html Bill (the other Bill H. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Hi Bill H,
Regarding the Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG, I'd say consider the Sigma 50-500mm F4-6.3 APO EX DG HSM or 80-400mm F4.5-5.6 APO EX OS instead. Both are much better lenses IMHO - and in the opion of many reviewers. Cheers -- "Bill H." wrote in message ... Which of these would you spend your money on? Tamron SP AF200-500mm F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) or Sigma APO 170-500mm F5-6.3 DG |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Bill Hilton wrote:
On the bright side, if you get a solidly constructed one you can do some real damage with it ... here are some shots a guy I know took in Africa last summer (I had given him some tips after he saw my Africa safari pics from last January) ... he was using one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm (maybe 100-500 or 50-500 or 170-500 if they make that one, I really can't remember but I can ask him). I think he had one of the Minolta digital bodies ... anyway, check the animals - birds (small and large), antelopes and cats and you'll see some really fine images. http://cjsmall.home.comcast.net/Tanzania/index.html Bill (the other Bill H. I emailed this photographer, asking which lens he used, and this was his reply ... (quote) "It was the Sigma APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG. I also had the 1.4x and 2.0x matched tele-converters which I used only infrequently. At just under $1000 I think this lens is a great bargain and I was very pleased with the sharpness of the results. Of course, the problem you face is loss of speed and the ability to open the lens to throw the background out of focus to the degree that you would like since you are limited to F6.3 when shooting at the extreme end of the telephoto range. On the plus side, it was great to be able to track the animals like the cats as approached the vehicle, backing off to 50mm. The manual operation of the lens was smooth, but there was also more time spent auto-focusing which I did find annoying as it caused me to miss a number of shots of birds in flight since the camera took too long to lock onto the subject. However, once my Minolta had focus, it tracks very well with this lens in continuous auto-focus mode. If you use the tele-converters, you must lock the lens for a minimum of 100mm rather than 50mm, otherwise the internals would collide with the extenders. I would recommend getting the 1.4x extender, but would probably skip the 2.0x. Autofocus will not work using the extenders except in the brightest light." (end quote) I think Roger Clark had one of these (or had access to one for testing) and thought it was very sharp at the 500 mm end, based on some resolution tests he ran. Though like me Roger now uses the Canon 500 f/4 L IS, which is a dream lens but about 5x as costly as this Sigma. I don't know how this 50-500 compares optically to the other Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm. Bill |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
Bill Hilton wrote:
Bill Hilton wrote: On the bright side, if you get a solidly constructed one you can do some real damage with it ... here are some shots a guy I know took in Africa last summer (I had given him some tips after he saw my Africa safari pics from last January) ... he was using one of the Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm (maybe 100-500 or 50-500 or 170-500 if they make that one, I really can't remember but I can ask him). I think he had one of the Minolta digital bodies ... anyway, check the animals - birds (small and large), antelopes and cats and you'll see some really fine images. http://cjsmall.home.comcast.net/Tanzania/index.html Bill (the other Bill H. I emailed this photographer, asking which lens he used, and this was his reply ... (quote) "It was the Sigma APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG. I also had the 1.4x and 2.0x matched tele-converters which I used only infrequently. At just under $1000 I think this lens is a great bargain and I was very pleased with the sharpness of the results. Of course, the problem you face is loss of speed and the ability to open the lens to throw the background out of focus to the degree that you would like since you are limited to F6.3 when shooting at the extreme end of the telephoto range. On the plus side, it was great to be able to track the animals like the cats as approached the vehicle, backing off to 50mm. The manual operation of the lens was smooth, but there was also more time spent auto-focusing which I did find annoying as it caused me to miss a number of shots of birds in flight since the camera took too long to lock onto the subject. However, once my Minolta had focus, it tracks very well with this lens in continuous auto-focus mode. If you use the tele-converters, you must lock the lens for a minimum of 100mm rather than 50mm, otherwise the internals would collide with the extenders. I would recommend getting the 1.4x extender, but would probably skip the 2.0x. Autofocus will not work using the extenders except in the brightest light." (end quote) I think Roger Clark had one of these (or had access to one for testing) and thought it was very sharp at the 500 mm end, based on some resolution tests he ran. Though like me Roger now uses the Canon 500 f/4 L IS, which is a dream lens but about 5x as costly as this Sigma. I don't know how this 50-500 compares optically to the other Sigma zooms that go to 500 mm. Bill Bill, others, I have the Sigma 170-500, and rate my lens sharper than the Canon 100-400 L IS. I replaced the 170-500 with the 100-400 due to the IS. I felt the IS helped more than the slight loss in sharpness hurt. But then with experience I just was not satisfied with my 100-400's sharpness, especially at the long end. I replaced it with a 300 f/4 L IS, which I find really sharp, even with a 1.4x, it beats the 100-400 in my experience, is lighter and costs less. For wildlife trips, I generally carry the 500 f/4 L IS, 300 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/4 L IS, and 28-135 IS, 1.4x and 2x TCs. When I need to travel lighter, I leave the 500 home, e.g. I just returned from Hawaii and took the above minus the 500. See: A Lens test Canon EOS 100-400mm L IS vs Sigma 170-500mm vs Canon 75-300mm IS http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/lenstest1.html Roger http://www.clarkvision.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron or Sigma Long Zoom Lenses?
If you use the tele-converters, you must lock the lens for a minimum of
100mm rather than 50mm, otherwise the internals would collide with the extenders. That depends on whose extenders you use. Certainly this is the case with he Sigma and Canon extenders, but is not so with the Kenko Teleplus Pro series. Cheers -- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
repost: Tamron/Sigma lenses | Jasen | Digital SLR Cameras | 3 | October 9th 05 07:17 PM |
Comments on Tamron and Sigma lenses | PM | Digital SLR Cameras | 16 | September 13th 05 02:00 PM |
FS: Tamron and Sigma Canon mount AF lenses | grenner | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 2 | October 2nd 04 10:21 PM |
zoom lens Nikkor vs. Sigma vs. Tamron?? | W Chan | 35mm Photo Equipment | 26 | June 23rd 04 01:50 AM |
FS: Tamron/Pentax zoom & Canon FTb & FD Lenses | Collin Brendemuehl | General Equipment For Sale | 0 | November 23rd 03 01:19 AM |