Questions about fast zoom

GraphyFotoz

Ok here is the scoup.....I want a good faster lens with some reach.
I'm on the road to selling stuff off on ebay to raise the funds.

To give you an idea of what I have been researching:

Sigma 70-200mm APO DG 2.8 (Which I'd use with a 2x tele)
Sigma 170-500mm DG f5-6.3
Tamron 200-500mm XR Di

Looking for something that's not as long as my arm....gotta be able to fit in my BP. Probably in the area of 6-8in long.

Now I will not be able to get one of these new but if I could score a excellent cond 2nd hand for arount $500-$600 would suit me fine.

I think I'll rule out anything in Canon L cuz it's just to damn pricy!
Other than the finish one em Simga seem to make a nice sturdy lens for the price.

Gonna take a bit to raise the $$ but looking for input so I can achive a goal here!:dunno :scratch

BTW: I have a 10D so IS I don't think will work?
also is something DG really important or not?
I'm gonna need this for wildlife pics.

Looking for input and possibly someone who might be looking to future upgrade......

Bob Bell

GraphyFotoz wrote:

Ok here is the scoup.....I want a good faster lens with some reach.
I'm on the road to selling stuff off on ebay to raise the funds.

To give you an idea of what I have been researching:

Sigma 70-200mm APO DG 2.8 (Which I'd use with a 2x tele)
Sigma 170-500mm DG f5-6.3
Tamron 200-500mm XR Di

Looking for something that's not as long as my arm....gotta be able to fit in my BP. Probably in the area of 6-8in long.

Now I will not be able to get one of these new but if I could score a excellent cond 2nd hand for arount $500-$600 would suit me fine.

I think I'll rule out anything in Canon L cuz it's just to damn pricy!
Other than the finish one em Simga seem to make a nice sturdy lens for the price.

Gonna take a bit to raise the $$ but looking for input so I can achive a goal here!

BTW: I have a 10D so IS I don't think will work?
also is something DG really important or not?
I'm gonna need this for wildlife pics.

Looking for input and possibly someone who might be looking to future upgrade......

I'm pretty sure that IS works on all EOS bodies. I know a 300/2.8 IS will work on a D60.

What are you current lenses?

GraphyFotoz

Bob Bell wrote:

I'm pretty sure that IS works on all EOS bodies. I know a 300/2.8 IS will work on a D60.

What are you current lenses?

Current zoom is a consumer grade 75-300mm f4-5.6 USM III.
Want more reach and a lil more speed.:):

DanielB

yes graphy, it'll work, the IS is in the lens. not camera.

and if i were you i would go with the Sigma 70-200 and then get a 1.4 too, because sometimes you'll want the extra speed of f/4 instead of f/5.6 and a little less reach

plus you can use it for 2 different purposes, 70-200, then just slap the converter on there and you've got a birding lens.

as opposed to the others that are specialty lenses.

almost went with it myself, but decided to go w/ the Canon.

Bob Bell

My hobby of the last couple weeks has been photographing birds and im using a 400+1.4x and dont have enough FL. Thats 560mm. I would recommend checking out that 200-500 and see if you can use a 1.4x on it for 700. When its sunny out the aperture wont be an issue especially since ISO 400 needed t to keep the SS up.

gluwater

Bob Bell wrote:

My hobby of the last couple weeks has been photographing birds and im using a 400+1.4x and dont have enough FL. Thats 560mm. I would recommend checking out that 200-500 and see if you can use a 1.4x on it for 700. When its sunny out the aperture wont be an issue especially since ISO 400 needed t to keep the SS up.

Correct me if i'm wrong here but with the 200-500 you will lose AF if using a Canon 1.4TC unless you tape the connectors. I would be a little skepticle on sharpness using a TC on this lens also.
What about the Bigma? Sigma 50-500. Used they go for around $650-$700 if I remember correctly.

Bob Bell

gluwater wrote:

Correct me if i'm wrong here but with the 200-500 you will lose AF if using a Canon 1.4TC unless you tape the connectors. I would be a little skepticle on sharpness using a TC on this lens also.
What about the Bigma? Sigma 50-500. Used they go for around $650-$700 if I remember correctly.

Im not that familiar with the technology in the 200-500 but modern bodies will meter correctly when the aperture is wrong.

The bigma might be already but 10x optical formulas don't have a great history from any manufacturer.

Teleconverters always hurt the main lens. But being able to have 70mm at F8/F11 is fine when its sunny out.

DJ-S1

The bigma gets very good reviews, check out FM reviews. I just bought a used one here on this very forum. When the USPS gets it's collective head out of it's a** then maybe I will have it in my hands so I can show you some shots.

Bob&Glennie

Bob Bell wrote:

My hobby of the last couple weeks has been photographing birds and im using a 400+1.4x and dont have enough FL. Thats 560mm. I would recommend checking out that 200-500 and see if you can use a 1.4x on it for 700. When its sunny out the aperture wont be an issue especially since ISO 400 needed t to keep the SS up.

Mr. Graphy Sir, I totally agree with Mr. Bell that 560 mm (equiv.) is definitely NOT long enough. I also have the equivillent maximum of 560mm using a Sigma 55-200mm with an Olympus 1.4x converter on my Oly 4/3 camera. IT'S NOT LONG ENOUGH. BUY THE BIGMA>

Bob.

gluwater

Bob Bell wrote:

Im not that familiar with the technology in the 200-500 but modern bodies will meter correctly when the aperture is wrong.

The bigma might be already but 10x optical formulas don't have a great history from any manufacturer.

Teleconverters always hurt the main lens. But being able to have 70mm at F8/F11 is fine when its sunny out.

What I meant was that with the TC on you will be shooting at f/8 wide open and with any TC's that report aperture the body(with the exception of 1 series) will lose the ability to autofocus. I do agree with you that the body will still meter correctly.
I also agree with you that zooms with a very wide range tend to be soft but I have seen great work from the 50-500. I have not personally used one but there are a few people on here that have and have shown good work. Search the Wildlife forum for Bigma or 50-500 and you will find pages of posts.

I have to disagree about shooting at f/8-f/11 though. The Autofocus will be hunting like mad if it will work at all. So unless you are planning on shooting stationary subjects where MF will be fine then I would reconsider this choice.

Graphy I know you want the reach and you spend your money wisely so don't just take my opinion on this, take our advice and research it further until you are comfortable in your decision. I hope whatever lens you decide on fits your needs and you are happy with it.

DanielB

if i'm correct Graphy has already pretty much ruled out the Bigma because of the weight involved...



which could easily be fixed by a monopod or tripod.

Scott_Quier

gluwater wrote:

Correct me if i'm wrong here but with the 200-500 you will lose AF if using a Canon 1.4TC unless you tape the connectors.

Tape the connectors? Can you point me in the right direction to read up on this? What are the pros/cons of doing this?

Thanks

gluwater

Scott_Quier wrote:

Tape the connectors? Can you point me in the right direction to read up on this? What are the pros/cons of doing this?

Thanks

There are connectors on some TC's that report the Aperture to the camera. If you put tape over these connectors they do not report to the camera body.
An example of why you would want to do this. I have a 20D and a 400 f/5.6. If I use the Canon 1.4TC it reports aperture making it a 560mm f/8. The 20D will not auto focus with an f/8 lens (the 1 series bodys will) So to be able to use auto focus I could either tape the connectors or get a TC that does not report Aperture like the Tamron 1.4TC. I'll see if I can find any good articles about this when I get home. Hope this makes sense.

BigAl

Bob Bell wrote:

The bigma might be already but 10x optical formulas don't have a great history from any manufacturer.

There is more than enough evidence around to show that in this case of the Bigma, this is not true. Sigma created something really special in the optics of the Bigma.