I dont own one but i did read about it a lot prrior to buying my canon & from what i read...bigal is on the money with the 50-500 being better (quite a lot better).
Bigma vs. 170-500
I don't own either the Bigma (50-500mm F4-6.3) or the model you are interested in--I've only seen shots from both models on a Pentax forum.
The Bigma is considered to be a superior lens, though the 170-500 is pretty good. The Bigma has a zoom lock, the other one doesn't. With a big lens, that's important. The focusing ring on the Bigma is a little faster too. The Bigma is a little over 4 lbs; the other about 2.5 lbs. The Bigma is significantly more expensive.
I have been more impressed with the Bigma picture quality--color rendition and sharpness is remarkably good for a zoom (I'm more of a prime lens guy). But it's heavy. And expensive.
Also: for more reach with what you got, you can always try out a high quality 1.4x teleconverter.
I also went through the dilemma of what to get for longer reach. (although I shoot Canon)
From starting with a Quantaray 100-400, then 70-300/f4-5.6, then 70-200/f2.8 and 400/f5.6...I can tell you that the glass quality makes all the difference. Obviously coming from the Q, but I even noticed the difference from the 70-300. If you can do it, go for quality over reach and maybe a TC.
My $0.02
40D, 400 f5.6L, 70-200 f2.8L, 50 f1.8, Tam 17-50 f2.8
Thanks everyone for your input. Price is what holding my down Bigma is all nice, but it's heavy compare to Sigma, and money wise sigma is cheaper. May be i can opt for a 400mm instead
Thanks everyone for your input. Price is what holding my down Bigma is all nice, but it's heavy compare to Sigma, and money wise sigma is cheaper. May be i can opt for a 400mm instead
Having done the same due diligence a year ago, my research indicated the consensus for moderately priced alternatives to get to 500mm seems to be--
Nikon 300 f/4 + 1.4X TC
Tamron 200-500 Di
Bigma
--The 300 f/4 + TC has best IQ but is a bit more pricey and is a fized focal length
--The Tamron has a bit slower AF in lower light and IQ better in the 300 range
--The Bigma has the better AF and contrast; especially in lower light, compared to the Tamron
--All best shot on stable tripod but, it good light, can produce good images w/monopod or good hand holding techniques and faster shutter speeds.
Availability of used copies seem to be in reversed order:
--Bigma most available
--Tamron 200-500
--300 f/4
If low light/poor shooting conditions are prevalent (such as cloudy UK et al), all seem to be sometimes frustrating due to slower long end apertures. In good light/shooting conditions, with good techniques, can produce some good images.
A lot of my birding images in my galleries are hand held with the Bigma/D50
My personal Bigma review after 2-months of shooting last year-- http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?p=181762#post181762
Thank you Dave, lots of info. I visited few sites and from what i read, Sigma is quiet slow on focusing. I don't need one right this moment, but good to know that we have options and choices.
I just got the Sigma 80-400 OS lens and it is wonderful. It works with my D80 and my wife's D40. Is very sharp at both ends and the focusing is pretty quick once you learn the lens. The OS (VR in Nikon Speak) works awesome and it is handholdable (not for hours) but it is balances great. It runs about $900-$1000 but, I think, worth every penny.:ivar
Ray Larson
Nikon D80, D300, D700 all gripped, Nikkor 50 f1.8 Nikkor 18-200 VR Nikkor 70-200 VR f2.8 Nikkor 28-300 VR, Sigma 50-150 f2.8 Sigma 80-400 OS Sigma 150-500 OS Nikon SB600
Da Bigma
Morning Folks,
I have Da Bigma and although I tried to sell it twice, both buyers backed out. After looking at some of the pics I shot with this lens, then, shooting a few (hundred) in RAW and playin' around with them, I decided to keep the beast. Sure it's heavy, slightly over 4lbs, not including the camera, but I have taken sharp hand held shots at 500mm. I shoot iso400 and it's usually sunny. Now, with the exception of indoor, low light & wide angle shots, this lens cannot be beat. Canon's 100-400mm IS and Sigma's 80-400mm IS lens are indeed, very good, and, they have the IS. However, they both cost a bit more (used), and do not have the extreme range the Bigma has. This is an incredible photographic tool. Having shot with all 3 of these lenses (not at the same time), the Bigma is my choice of weapon, next to my Tamron 18-50 2.8.
Have a good day
Jim...
I have the Bigma (Sigma 50-500) ... it is a great lens, optics equal to the Canon 100-400 L. The extreme range is very useful in many things that I shoot. If your needs are birding ... then all you need is the 500mm end and the 200-500 Tammy at nearly half the weight may be a better bet.
Hi - imho... go for the 50-500 as it's definitely superior to the 170-500.
The Bigma, though heavy is a great lens. Play around with the camera's ISO settings and you will get great results. I find that handheld shots are quite easily taken up to approx 320mm, beyond that a tripod is recommended.
Good luck with your choice!
Cheers - Herman
My motto: To learn more today, than I knew yesterday!
THanks for those examples, Gary. This thread got me thinking...my 70-200/2.8 is great for the purpose I got it for (theater), but is a bit short for zoo shots. So I've been starting to look at bigger guns & my f2.8-or-bust attitude has required some adjusting. It looks like the Bigma is the ticket--funny how I completely ignored it until now.
THanks for those examples, Gary. This thread got me thinking...my 70-200/2.8 is great for the purpose I got it for (theater), but is a bit short for zoo shots. So I've been starting to look at bigger guns & my f2.8-or-bust attitude has required some adjusting. It looks like the Bigma is the ticket--funny how I completely ignored it until now.
Hey Chris-
Since you're in SoCal ... come to a LAShooter event ... many of us have Bigma's and you can check it out (if you shoot with Canon.) Or just pm/email moi and we can meet somewhere for a test run.
Hey Chris-
Since you're in SoCal ... come to a LAShooter event ... many of us have Bigma's and you can check it out (if you shoot with Canon.) Or just pm/email moi and we can meet somewhere for a test run.
Gary
Yup, I shoot a 20D. Though, on reading more reviews, the Tamron 200-500 is looking really promising--not that I can get any of these monsters any time soon, but window shopping & planning sure is fun in the meantime.
I'll have to check & see if I can make a meet. Currently two big projects that must be done by the holidays are starting to press for time & cash, so photo outings are hard to do the rest of the year. :cry I do appreciate the offer & will contact you if an opportunity arises.
Yup, I shoot a 20D. Though, on reading more reviews, the Tamron 200-500 is looking really promising--not that I can get any of these monsters any time soon, but window shopping & planning sure is fun in the meantime.
I'll have to check & see if I can make a meet. Currently two big projects that must be done by the holidays are starting to press for time & cash, so photo outings are hard to do the rest of the year. :cry I do appreciate the offer & will contact you if an opportunity arises.
Comments
http://www.outdoorphoto.co.za/forum/photopost/showgallery.php?cat=500&ppuser=5679&sl=l
Bugs
Spiders
Flowers
I don't own either the Bigma (50-500mm F4-6.3) or the model you are interested in--I've only seen shots from both models on a Pentax forum.
The Bigma is considered to be a superior lens, though the 170-500 is pretty good. The Bigma has a zoom lock, the other one doesn't. With a big lens, that's important. The focusing ring on the Bigma is a little faster too. The Bigma is a little over 4 lbs; the other about 2.5 lbs. The Bigma is significantly more expensive.
I have been more impressed with the Bigma picture quality--color rendition and sharpness is remarkably good for a zoom (I'm more of a prime lens guy). But it's heavy. And expensive.
Also: for more reach with what you got, you can always try out a high quality 1.4x teleconverter.
From starting with a Quantaray 100-400, then 70-300/f4-5.6, then 70-200/f2.8 and 400/f5.6...I can tell you that the glass quality makes all the difference. Obviously coming from the Q, but I even noticed the difference from the 70-300. If you can do it, go for quality over reach and maybe a TC.
My $0.02
www.intruecolors.com
Nikon D700 x2/D300
Nikon 70-200 2.8/50 1.8/85 1.8/14.24 2.8
Having done the same due diligence a year ago, my research indicated the consensus for moderately priced alternatives to get to 500mm seems to be--
Nikon 300 f/4 + 1.4X TC
Tamron 200-500 Di
Bigma
--The Sigma 170-500 seems to be a hit or miss with good copies
http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_83590_3128crx.aspx
--The 300 f/4 + TC has best IQ but is a bit more pricey and is a fized focal length
--The Tamron has a bit slower AF in lower light and IQ better in the 300 range
--The Bigma has the better AF and contrast; especially in lower light, compared to the Tamron
--All best shot on stable tripod but, it good light, can produce good images w/monopod or good hand holding techniques and faster shutter speeds.
Availability of used copies seem to be in reversed order:
--Bigma most available
--Tamron 200-500
--300 f/4
If low light/poor shooting conditions are prevalent (such as cloudy UK et al), all seem to be sometimes frustrating due to slower long end apertures. In good light/shooting conditions, with good techniques, can produce some good images.
A lot of my birding images in my galleries are hand held with the Bigma/D50
My personal Bigma review after 2-months of shooting last year--
http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?p=181762#post181762
User survey of performance ratings for various lenses--
http://www.photozone.de/active/survey/querylens.jsp
Bigma Reviews-- (Site has a number of other links to Bigma reviews...
http://www.luminepixels.com/bigma.html
Tamron 200-500 review--
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/tamron_200500_563/index.htm
Apple Valley, CA
D50-BIGMA-70-300VRII-35f2D-18-70DX-FZ30
My SmugMug Image Galleries
My Nikonian Image Galleries
www.intruecolors.com
Nikon D700 x2/D300
Nikon 70-200 2.8/50 1.8/85 1.8/14.24 2.8
Nikon D80, D300, D700 all gripped, Nikkor 50 f1.8 Nikkor 18-200 VR Nikkor 70-200 VR f2.8 Nikkor 28-300 VR, Sigma 50-150 f2.8 Sigma 80-400 OS Sigma 150-500 OS Nikon SB600
Morning Folks,
I have Da Bigma
Have a good day
Jim...
My Bigma Range Test can be found here:
http://garyayala.smugmug.com/gallery/1158485#54071917
a couple of 500mm Bigma shots
Unsharp at any Speed
The Bigma, though heavy is a great lens. Play around with the camera's ISO settings and you will get great results. I find that handheld shots are quite easily taken up to approx 320mm, beyond that a tripod is recommended.
Good luck with your choice!
Cheers - Herman
Nikon gear & some lenses.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Hey Chris-
Since you're in SoCal ... come to a LAShooter event ... many of us have Bigma's and you can check it out (if you shoot with Canon.) Or just pm/email moi and we can meet somewhere for a test run.
Gary
Unsharp at any Speed
Yup, I shoot a 20D. Though, on reading more reviews, the Tamron 200-500 is looking really promising--not that I can get any of these monsters any time soon, but window shopping & planning sure is fun in the meantime.
I'll have to check & see if I can make a meet. Currently two big projects that must be done by the holidays are starting to press for time & cash, so photo outings are hard to do the rest of the year. :cry I do appreciate the offer & will contact you if an opportunity arises.
http://www.chrislaudermilkphoto.com/
Sure ...
Unsharp at any Speed