|
Author
|
|
Scott67
Exhausted !
Registered: March 2003
Location: North West
Posts: 115
|
|
Review Date: Wed October 29, 2003
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Its Quite Cheap, Quality is excellent, see review...
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy
|
|
The trouble with Bird photography is that invariably you need a big lens, generally anything below 300mm leaves you hopefull you have that rare/action/interesting shot, but often disappointed when you finally view the slide only to see a small indistinct brown shape occupying about 1% of the frame.
So really 300mm is a good starting point for SLR/35mm wildlife photography, Obviously if your using a digital SLR then things are a lot easier as most prosumer DSLR's have a multiplyer effect of about 1.3x to 1.6x due to the size of the sensor.
Now then What to choose ?
I am a Canon EOS user so naturally first point of call EOS lenses.
Mmmm very nice too all white with Ultrasonic motors and low dispertion glass, Image stabilisers too and HOW MUCH !!!
Now I'm not saying Canon 'L' glass is'nt worth every penny but I want to take pictures with a clear conscience not with a huge bank loan around my neck.
Which after much digression brings me to the thorny subjct of 'Independent Lenses'
Some Photographers love them, some Photographers absolutely detest them, usually without trying them first ( Brand snobbery is a terrible thing )
My name is Scott and I'm a Sigma user...
I bought about 2 years ago the Sigma 300f4 HSM APO Macro, it cost £500.00 and was less than half the price of a Canon equivalent, is it half the quality ?
Well...
I cant tell the difference with my untrained eye between Photographs taken with my Sigma lens to those taken with a friends EOS 300 f4 IS.
It (The Sigma )focuses quickly due to its HSM or Hyper sonic motor, which is similar to Canons own USM
Its has a nice focus limiter as well as a MF/AF overide which is usefull for fine focusing in AF mode
APO construction, virtually nil flare with the Lens hood, NO noticable vignetting.
77mm Filter thread, Tripod collar, Nice case to store it in.
Now I have used this Lens all over the UK and it has never let me down, I've taken Hundreds of Rolls of slides with it and the results are always excellent.
So would I buy one?, well yes but only second hand now as its discontinued.
Is it good enough for Bird Photography ?
Probably not really, but using lens at about 300mm will discipline you and encourage you to learn good field craft ( i.e sneaking up on things !)
The only downside to this lens are,
Its heavy,
The Tripod collar is well made but inteferes with the camera if using a battery grip attached to the body when tripod mounted.
It might not work with newer EOS Cameras, But Sigma will re-chip it, possibly for free.
It wont keep its value like a Canon L lens will but Its such a good lens you probably wont care.
------------------------------
My God, its full of Stars !
|
|
|
|
angus56
Registered User
Registered: May 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Thu May 4, 2006
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, also good with TC 1.4
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy
|
|
I\'ve owned this lens for more than a decade now - to be honest I\'ve forgotten when I bought it. My version has a Pentax-fitting and therefore no USM.
Very consistent and has entered into a new life since I went digital two years ago - 420mm @ f4 is really something.
Apart from the weight I cannot really give any negative comments - already very sharp open and simply great at 5.6 and beyond. I also own the two Sigma APO TCs - 1.4 works very well but actually not any better or worse than a 1.5 Kenko I bought second hand somewhere. With the TC 2 the sharpness drops to still acceptable but no longer excellent.
Autofocus is good enough for me - Macro and close-up this lens is really great.
Overall I\'d highly recommend picking one up if you can get your hands on it.
|
|
|
|
|
jfmgb777
Registered User
Registered: June 2006
Location: West of England
Posts: 53
|
|
Review Date: Wed January 13, 2010
|
Would you recommend the product? Yes |
Price you paid?: None indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
VERY sharp with good depth of field at f/8; PRICE!!!
|
|
Cons:
|
Built-in lens hood too short; older copies won't work on newer Canon digital cameras; really need 400 mm f/5.6 version
|
|
I managed to get hold of the older non-HSM version on eBay. It would seem to have been re-chipped to work with Canon digital SLRs (mine is a 350D). [Canon users please note: many older copies of the Sigma 300 mm f/4 and 400 mm f/5.6 only work at full aperture (fully open) with modern Canon DSLRs - don't buy off eBay unless the seller can guarantee compatibility with your model. Older copies in Minolta/Sony mount, although comparatively rare, don't suffer from this problem. I am not sure about Nikon mount versions.]
I am delighted with this lens in terms of quality and usability. I can blow up the images far more than I could with any of my previous lenses (Tamron 200-500, Sigma 120-400 OS, Sigma 50-500). It has a focus limiter, which speeds up the already quick autofocusing, is lighter than all but the Tamron, and I can get what I would consider good results of distant small birds of prey (e.g., kestrel) at f/8. Because I shoot at such range (I don't have the time or inclination to improve my fieldcraft), I find that this gives me the best sharpness. The reduced shutter speed is acceptable because I use either a shoulder-holder or a tripod and cable release.
Despite its relatively short focal length, the multiplication factor of 1.6 on a Canon DSLR makes it equivalent to 480 mm on a 35mm full-format SLR. The wider field-of-view also enables one to keep the bird in view easily. It is therefore a good lens for someone beginning bird photography (especially if interested in birds in flight) who either cannot afford or does not wish to spend £600 to £1000+ for a lens alone.
I did try it in combination with a Kenko Pro 1.4x teleconverter to give me 400 mm f/5.6 (equivalent to 672 mm on a 35 mm/full format camera). However, I found that I got better results by leaving the TC off and blowing the images up further.
The only major gripe I have is that the built-in lens hood is too short to prevent flaring, especially if one is shooting with the sun at right angles to the target.
Now, if I could only get a re-chipped 400 mm f/5.6 for around £300...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Welcome to BirdForum.
