• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Yet another which lens thread (sort of) (1 Viewer)

D

desperately seeking

Member
Hi all...

My first post. I'm looking for some advice on... well the title says it all, sort
of.

I own an old (read first edition - I bought it second hand and have had it for five years) 170-500 lens. I've loved it but it recently let me down on a trip to Scotland when the AF showed its true colours (any low contrast/low light situations and the thing would hunt more than lock on).

I now have the opportunity to upgrade. I'm going to Scotland again in March to shoot (with a camera ;) ) raptors. I've been asking around and at the moment I'm leaning towards the 50-500 DG HSM. Before I buy, however, I want to be sure that this will be a significant improvement over the 170-500.

Any other suggestions for lenses would also be appreciated but with these caveats:
1) I don't like TCs - no reason, I just don't!
2) I'm sort of fixed on a zoom rather than a prime - the idea of a big lens that only does "one job" goes against me for some reason.
3) At a push my budget (for the lens) is around £1000 - but if I can I'd like to be able to get other stuff, like a decent 35mm (ish) (I own a 350d so this would be the equivalent of a 50mm) lens for and/or a macro flash for my 100mm f2.8 Canon Macro.

I will be owning a tripod soon (Manfrotto 458B+322RC2 head) so the weight of the lens isn't really an issue - plus I have successfully hand-held the 170-500 in the past.

Anyone got any good suggestions - advice?

TIA

DS
 
Last edited:
desperately seeking said:
Hi all...

My first post. I'm looking for some advice on... well the title says it all, sort
of.

I own an old (read first edition - I bought it second hand and have had it for five years) 170-500 lens. I've loved it but it recently let me down on a trip to Scotland when the AF showed its true colours (any low contrast/low light situations and the thing would hunt more than lock on).

I now have the opportunity to upgrade. I'm going to Scotland again in March to shoot (with a camera ;) ) raptors. I've been asking around and at the moment I'm leaning towards the 50-500 DG HSM. Before I buy, however, I want to be sure that this will be a significant improvement over the 170-500.

Any other suggestions for lenses would also be appreciated but with these caveats:
1) I don't like TCs - no reason, I just don't!
2) I'm sort of fixed on a zoom rather than a prime - the idea of a big lens that only does "one job" goes against me for some reason.
3) At a push my budget (for the lens) is around £1000 - but if I can I'd like to be able to get other stuff, like a decent 35mm (ish) (I own a 350d so this would be the equivalent of a 50mm) lens for and/or a macro flash for my 100mm f2.8 Canon Macro.

I will be owning a tripod soon (Manfrotto 458B+322RC2 head) so the weight of the lens isn't really an issue - plus I have successfully hand-held the 170-500 in the past.

Anyone got any good suggestions - advice?

TIA

DS
Click to expand...


Hi and welcome to Birdforum.

Your question is a pretty common one here on the forum so a delve through the old threads should provide a wealth of (often contradictory ;) )information.

However, to keep it simple I have owned and was hugely impressed by the 50-500. Image quality and AF speed for the price were excellent. You mention raptors so I've att a link to my trip to Gigrin Farm with the lens http://www.pbase.com/pauls_20d/gigrin_farm
Shopping around should easily get you the lens well under budget.
The AF is miles faster (and quieter) than the 170-500 so you should notice a big difference from that point of view.
A newer lens that is highly praised is the Tamron 200-500, checkout DOCs gallery for some cracking images. A recent UK magazine rated it highly but bafflingly didn't recommend it for sports/wildlife photography. I can only assume its because the AF is more like the 170-500 and is slower and needs more light than the 50-500.
I think its common knowledge that neither lens like tc's. A lot of those Gigrin Shots are obviously big crops but I think the results are still acceptable by using the lens on its own and then cropping in computer.

Hope that helps

Paul
 
Last edited:
I am also a fan of the 50-500, having owned 2 copies (currently have the DG version having trashed my old one through sand in the focus mechanism). Both lenses have been excellent value for money.
Positives; cheap 500mm lens, excellent range, with reasonable performance throughout. Should have some spare from your £1000 budget for other kit.
Negatives: heavy - on your camera at 500mm it will affect the balance, and windage can make holding it steady difficult especially with the hood on. Max apeture 6.3 at 500mm, so a bit slow compared to the prime lenses. Large filter size.

On the whole it does its job very well. I'm not familiar with the tamron 200-500, but it gets good reviews.
 
Paul, thanks for the reply - I was hoping this would be the case; I didn't want to buy the Bigma and find out it had the same issues as the "little Bigma!"

Love the Red Kite shots - it's one of my favourite birds. I have to travel up the M40 to BAnbury for work sometimes and I always see ten or twenty of them on the way. I actually saw a couple in Kent this summer floating over a cricket ground near Dartford. Saw some good ones on the Black Isle in Scotland this summer too.

Gordon - thanks for the tips - I've been using the 170-500 for a while now so I'm sort of used to the balance etc - although it was orginally used on an EOS30 (film) and I've hardly used it on the 350D. I've got a filter from the 170 (I'm assuming it's the same size as the 50). The speed is something you have to deal with when you've not got several thousand to spend on a Canon L f2.8 beast!

It looks like I'll be getting the Bigma when the bonus comes through on payday - now I've got to find a good price.

Roll on March and the Golden Eagles, Goshawks and Tawny Owls!

Thanks all

DS
 
desperately seeking said:
Hi all...

My first post. I'm looking for some advice on... well the title says it all, sort
of.

I own an old (read first edition - I bought it second hand and have had it for five years) 170-500 lens. I've loved it but it recently let me down on a trip to Scotland when the AF showed its true colours (any low contrast/low light situations and the thing would hunt more than lock on).

I now have the opportunity to upgrade. I'm going to Scotland again in March to shoot (with a camera ;) ) raptors. I've been asking around and at the moment I'm leaning towards the 50-500 DG HSM. Before I buy, however, I want to be sure that this will be a significant improvement over the 170-500.

Any other suggestions for lenses would also be appreciated but with these caveats:
1) I don't like TCs - no reason, I just don't!
2) I'm sort of fixed on a zoom rather than a prime - the idea of a big lens that only does "one job" goes against me for some reason.
3) At a push my budget (for the lens) is around £1000 - but if I can I'd like to be able to get other stuff, like a decent 35mm (ish) (I own a 350d so this would be the equivalent of a 50mm) lens for and/or a macro flash for my 100mm f2.8 Canon Macro.

I will be owning a tripod soon (Manfrotto 458B+322RC2 head) so the weight of the lens isn't really an issue - plus I have successfully hand-held the 170-500 in the past.

Anyone got any good suggestions - advice?

TIA

DS
Click to expand...

I've been considering what to get for my 350d for a few months and after much research and seeking advice I've decided it has to be the canon 100 - 400 (haven't found the money yet, small matter of moving house first). Although it isn't as big, from what I can gather - and I'm happy to be corrected by someone who knows more - the optical quality is such that you'd be better of cropping a picture taken with the canon at 400 then having a picture from one of the rest at 500. Plus it has the big advantage of IS. It's a pain as obviously it is by a long way the most expensive but I decided I didn't want to buy a cheaper lens that I would soon replace. From the reviews I read the tamron 200 - 500 seemed to the best of the rest.

Steve

Steve
 
Steve,
I'd love to get a Canon zoom but it's over my budget unfortunately. The IS isn't really a plus point as I'm looking to get as many "in flight" shots as standing and the fast shutter speeds will negate the IS somewhat.

DS
 
Hi DS,

From my experience the Bigma has the following benefits/differences:

Lens gives slightly sharper results

Faster and near-silent AF (still hunts in low-light conditions)

More versatile zoom range ( I use mine as a "super-macro" by attaching a 13mm extension tube; ideal for close-ups of butterflies, etc.)

Standard of body finish better

Noticeably heavier ( a good tripod is recommended)

Zoom lock useful when carrying over shoulder


Not wishing to confuse the issue too much, but my wife uses a Canon 100-400 IS lens which she swears by for quality of images and higher proportion of "keepers". She always shoot hand-held with some impressive results.

Hope this has been of some use.

Sandpiper
 
desperately seeking said:
Steve,
I'd love to get a Canon zoom but it's over my budget unfortunately. The IS isn't really a plus point as I'm looking to get as many "in flight" shots as standing and the fast shutter speeds will negate the IS somewhat.

DS
Click to expand...

You can get a canon 100 - 400 for £880 PM for email address of ebay seller, so it leaves you a bit of your budget. I would have thought for birds in flight IS would be a big advantage as handholding a camera makes it alot easier to follow flying birds. Forgot to mention there is also a slighter cheaper Sigma 80 - 400 which is meant to be just as good optically but slower autofocus.

Steve
 
Steve Babbs said:
You can get a canon 100 - 400 for £880 PM for email address of ebay seller, so it leaves you a bit of your budget. I would have thought for birds in flight IS would be a big advantage as handholding a camera makes it alot easier to follow flying birds. Forgot to mention there is also a slighter cheaper Sigma 80 - 400 which is meant to be just as good optically but slower autofocus.

Steve
Click to expand...

Don't you switch the IS off when panning and using the lens on a tripod?

Paul
 
paul goode said:
Don't you switch the IS off when panning and using the lens on a tripod?

Paul
Click to expand...
IS,VR,OS or whatever you you use will slow down the af. When using on a tripod you should turn it off anyway as it can set up internal vibrations that can ruin an image. As far as i can see stabilisation is only an advantage on static subjects when handholding. I have a Sigma 80-400 os & have found i get better results when i have a fast shutter speed. (Especially for birds in flight.) Os does come into its own however when i use the lens in conjunction with an extension ring for perched dragonflys or butters. Stabilisation of a lens is not going to be the answer 90% of the time, but does come in handy now & again.
Regards Rob.
 
desperately seeking said:
Any other suggestions for lenses would also be appreciated but with these caveats:
1) I don't like TCs - no reason, I just don't!
2) I'm sort of fixed on a zoom rather than a prime - the idea of a big lens that only does "one job" goes against me for some reason.
3) At a push my budget (for the lens) is around £1000 - but if I can I'd like to be able to get other stuff, like a decent 35mm (ish) (I own a 350d so this would be the equivalent of a 50mm) lens for and/or a macro flash for my 100mm f2.8 Canon Macro.

Anyone got any good suggestions - advice?
Click to expand...

I, too, am a BIG fan of the BIGma (pun intended :smoke:).
Have owned mine for about 2 years and it's definitely been a workhorse.
Have gotten razor-sharp images at virtually all focal lengths and aperture settings.

If I go anywhere it's always at least one of the lenses I carry with me.
I've handheld it many, many times at 500mm (had to hold my breath for a few seconds while shooting) and it's never been all that much of a problem (the weight).

The only thing that I would consider to be a drawback with the 50-500 is the minimum f/4 setting. There have times, although few and far between when I REALLY NEEDED a 2.8-3.5 lens, and only had the Bigma with me.

One item I purchased is like gold to me. The Wimberly Head. What a jewel!
Can you say totally weightless manipulation?
I've mounted my D200 with grip and a Nikon 200-400 VR on it and was able to move the entire assembly on the X, Y and Z axis with 1 finger, and the camera + lens stayed exactly where I left it.
Might be something to consider later on down the line.

Best of luck, and get those shots!

-Ken
 
Still undecided!

OK - A month to go until the bonus comes through and I'm still struggling:
1) Canon 100-400 f4.5 etc on ebay for around £900 (give or take a few £s)
2) Bigma also on ebay but for around £550.

My budget is approx. £1000.

My dilemma -is the Canon lens really twice as good as the Bigma?

Any more suggestions?

TIA

DS
 
My dilemma -is the Canon lens really twice as good as the Bigma?

Any more suggestions?
Click to expand...

I've not had the chance to try the canon, but judging from the gallery here, and my experience of the bigma - probably not.
My advice is to get to a camera shop and try the lenses on your camera. It may be that the overall 'feel' of one will decide it for you.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 18 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

M
Sigma 150-600 Lens Alternatives
Replies
4
Views
1K
mike nesbitt
M
S
Yet another bridge camera thread...
Replies
4
Views
354
seawatcher
S
P
Advice for getting back into bird photography - Camera and Zoom lens
Replies
7
Views
1K
MelospizaMelodiaFan
MelospizaMelodiaFan
M
Budget camera to pair with Olympus 100-400mm Lens
2
Replies
29
Views
3K
njlarsen
njlarsen
H
Scope advice
Replies
7
Views
526
4John
4

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top