Bigma II Vs. I Vs. 150 - 500

Photoarts

I was wondering if anyone can tell me about the difference between the original Bigma and the Bigma II. Is is just better optics and newer version?

Also wondering about the sharpness and auto-focusing capabilities of the 150-500 OS Vs. the 50-500. I have heard about auto focus and sharpness of the 150-500 is questionable.
For a guy with 7D camera who is trying to get beyond the 300 mm and doesn't like the push pull focus of 100-400 and the prices on 400 & 500 Primes, what other choises remain and what is the best to reach out and catch birds and wildlife?

ziggy53

I have an older Sigma 50-500mm, f4.5-6.3 DG HSM APO "Bigma" and, to be honest, I don't care that much for it on the crop camera bodies (either a crop 1.6x, like your 7D, or a crop 1.3x, like a Canon 1D series). It works best on a FF body IMO.

It's also fairly soft at the long end and wide open, although if you think of it as a 50-500mm, f8-f11 it's not horrible. The lens is also rated a bit long. A more proper focal length rating is about 50-460mm, or so.

There have been a few different versions of the Bigma, but I'm not aware of a "II" model. The ones that I know about are:

Sigma 50-500mm, f4.5-6.3 DG HSM
Sigma 50-500mm, f4.5-6.3 DG HSM APO (APO=Apochromatic)
Sigma 50-500mm, f4.5-6.3 DG HSM OS APO (The "OS" stands for Optical Stabilization, I believe.)

Here is a comparison of the Bigma and the Canon EF 100-400mm, f4.5-f5.6L IS USM (The-Digital-Picture):

http://tinyurl.com/7d8oxso

Here is a comparison of the Bigma vs the Sigma 150-500mm, f5.6-f6.3 DG HSM OS APO

http://tinyurl.com/79qf6nz

My Bigma is a bit sharper than the above samples, but still a bit soft.

Here are some samples from last year at an airshow using the Bigma on a Canon 40D:





... and a 100 percent crop:



I would recommend the Canon 100-400mmL over the Bigma, if you can swing it.

I should mention that our user, "BigAl", has done some very nice work with the Bigma.

http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=89045
http://bigal-sa.smugmug.com/gallery/1545869#74534455

puzzledpaul

Photoarts wrote: »

and the prices on 400

Presumably you've also ruled out the 400 f5.6L too ... even bought used?

pp

Art Scott

Photoarts wrote: »

I was wondering if anyone can tell me about the difference between the original Bigma and the Bigma II. Is is just better optics and newer version?

Also wondering about the sharpness and auto-focusing capabilities of the 150-500 OS Vs. the 50-500. I have heard about auto focus and sharpness of the 150-500 is questionable.
For a guy with 7D camera who is trying to get beyond the 300 mm and doesn't like the push pull focus of 100-400 and the prices on 400 & 500 Primes, what other choises remain and what is the best to reach out and catch birds and wildlife?

I have the previous version of the Bigma and find very good on my Nikon D300 for Wildlife....the difference between it and the V ll is the OS Optical Stabilization .... I do not use it at focal lenghts between 50 and 200 very much, if ever....so for me the lower end of the focal lengths are pretty much worthless....but I find it great for Deer, Turkey and other wildlife...I shoot it on a tripod 99% of the time or on a stack of old pillows when shooting off my vehicle hood or the spare tire on the rear door...
I don't know canon but if you shot Nikon then I would suggest saving a bit of money by buying into some of the old manual focus lenses (AIS)....I thibnk there might even be adapters to go from Nikon to Canon, but do not know for sure.