Ciprian Ilie
(K=13571) - Comment Date 3/1/2006
|
Hi Nikola,
I haven't used it myself, but I know a couple of people who are using it with Canon (digital and film) bodies and they are getting excellent, very sharp results.
It looks like a very good lens for the price. Currently it retails in the UK for about £700.00.
Hope this helps you.
Regards,
Ciprian
|
|
|
|
Sashika Dias
(K=23) - Comment Date 3/1/2006
|
Yes, I have the 50-500 4.5-6.3 lens, and use it with Nikon D70 and D200 bodies. Anything specific you want to know?
|
|
|
|
Nikola Bilic
(K=221) - Comment Date 3/2/2006
|
Thanks Ciprian
Sashika,
I'm concern about sharpness of Sigma
Would like to see some shots but can't find on www.usefilm.com
I'm thinking about Nikon 300 F4 or Sigma 50-500
Nikon is very sharp I know that but it is not zoom
I did read some reviews and they so different
I see you do not have portfolio posted here which will be helpful
If you know who has it pass it to me
Thank you
Nikola Bilic
|
|
|
|
Angelo Villaschi
(K=49617) - Comment Date 4/19/2006
|
Nikola,
Look in my "Wildlife" portfolio (http://www.usefilm.com/photographer.asp?ID=34075&C=19) for some shots takend with the "Bigma" (what some of us have nick-named this lens.
It depends what you want it for.
This lens is good if:
. Space is at a premium
. You want to travel with a telephoto in your backpack
It does a good job in good lighting conditions.
Go for a prime if
. Light levels will be low in your photography
. You want to use a teleconverter (AF will not work on the 50-500 with a tele)
. You can afford one
I am considering buying a prime 300/2.8 with 2x tele at the moment.
Hope this helps.
|
|
|
|
Nikola Bilic
(K=221) - Comment Date 4/26/2006
|
Thanks to everybody
I made my mind
I bought Nikkor AF 80-200D ED F2.8 lens
This lens works with teleconverters and it is sharp
Thanks one more time
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 4/29/2006
|
I'd not consider the 80-200 to be a competitor to the 50-500 myself, not even with a TC.
But a good choice anyway, that's one fine lens.
Do keep in mind that the 80-200 f/2.8 AF-D Nikkor (in both its versions) will NOT work with Nikon teleconverters since Nikon teleconverters work only with AF-S Nikkors.
It should work with 3rd party teleconverters like Kenko and probably Sigma.
|
|
|
|
Nikola Bilic
(K=221) - Comment Date 5/4/2006
|
Thanks Jeroen for reply
It is very nice lens (80-200 2.8 AF D ED)
very sharp wit h very pleasing Bokeh
I have Tamron 2x TC and AF works very good
Iven with TC it is much sharper than 70-300 G vhich i use before
My concern is Size & weight
Cheers
Nikola
|
|
|
|
Jeroen Wenting
(K=25317) - Comment Date 6/18/2006
|
you guys got to do better to break the record of oldest revived forum thread ;)
|
|
|
|
Marcus Armani
(K=36599) - Comment Date 6/22/2006
|
Since this thread is old and dead I can say that I wouldnt use the sigma or bigma as they call it, for a paper weight! know many unhappy users of that worthless over 350mm lens Any Nikon AF-S or Canon L lens will eat that brick up....
|
|
|
|
Todd Wedgworth
(K=3433) - Comment Date 7/19/2006
|
|
|
|
|
Jacob French
(K=6315) - Comment Date 7/20/2006
|
I currently have the Sigma 50-500 in my arsenal and am very pleased with its performance. I don't, however, do a lot of nature photography. I use it primarily for children's sports matches. Teamed with a monopod, it is making me a nice bit of spare change! All the reviews I've read complain about the weight of the lens and how it's "impossible to handhold" but I'm not having any problems with the weight. I use the pod mainly to keep my tele shots from suffering due to shake. 500mm is tough to get steady all by yourself! Incidentally, this lens seems to work well below the 100mm mark as well, though I wouldn't recommend carrying it arund as your "street" lens, as the weight gets to you eventually (plus it looks like you're carrying a shoulder mounted rocket).
Late, I know, but 2 cents are in anyway.
J
|
|
|
|
Laurie J. Herndon
(K=5338) - Comment Date 12/7/2006
|
Having been a Sigma rep for a few years I've had the opportunity to use quite a few. The rule of thumb though (with any lens) is if you are purchasing one... try not to go more than 200mm between zoom elements. (i.e. 100mm to 300mm) would = 200. When you get into 50-500 you are talking about lots of elements. Sigma, although I consider them quite good for an "off brand" lens will start losing quality in the larger zoom amounts over 200. I shoot with all nikon untill recently going to digital with a small olympus. I still shoot weddings and quite a few of my backup lenses are Sigma. They always rendered a nice enough sharpness where portraits are concerned. Take into consideration, though that I was in retail over 5 years ago so the quality of some of the newer lenses may have gotten better since then. Don't think you have anything to worry about that you coulnd't "touch up" with photoshop if you were concerned about sharpness.
|
|
|
|
Steven Hackett
(K=1692) - Comment Date 1/14/2007
|
I have this lens on a Canon 5D and Minolta 7D
I have been able to take sharp photo's and I'm happy with it
Macro and cropping may require a tri/monopod to assist 
|
|
50-500mm Sigma
|
|
Chinthaka Prasad Gamage
(K=320) - Comment Date 4/18/2007
|
Anybody try Sigma 50-500 lens with Nikon D200 Digital SLR Camera?
How about the Sharpens, Focusing, Handling?
|
|
|
|
Michael Kanemoto
(K=22115) - Comment Date 8/2/2007
|
I've got the Bigma Sigma.
Nikon D80.
Not sharp at lowest F-Stop and opened to 500mm, some abberation. This is also a slow lens, so don't expect to go after low light situations. However, for the money this is a great lens with a 10X zoom rate.
You'll definitely be bodybuilding with this lens going handheld. I can do it. Most people can't.
If you are shooting sports you'll need a different lens. Actually, you should probably have a Canon for sports.
I break it out for some wildlife, and other times I need a major telephoto. I'm a nature photographer, so I didn't need great glass in a low F-Stop.
|
|
|
|
