Totally confused - which Sigma lens for birding? (1 Viewer)

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 7, 2006

I'm considering buying a Nikon D50 and 500mm lens for bird photography. Nothing fancy or professional, just reasonable shots. Having read through all the posts on BF and reviewed the plethora of lenses, I'm totally confused, especially by all these initials! Any recommendations, especially with regard to maintaining auto-focus? Or is the Tamron better? And what about teleconverters? In a nutshell please!!!
Many thanks.

paul goode · Mar 7, 2006

Aquila said:
I'm considering buying a Nikon D50 and 500mm lens for bird photography. Nothing fancy or professional, just reasonable shots. Having read through all the posts on BF and reviewed the plethora of lenses, I'm totally confused, especially by all these initials! Any recommendations, especially with regard to maintaining auto-focus? Or is the Tamron better? And what about teleconverters? In a nutshell please!!!
Many thanks.

Hi Aquila,

welcome to a minefield.

When you say 500mm and nothing fancy or professional I assume you mean a zoom and as this is in the Sigma thread I assume the Nikon kit is a bit pricey (guessing, know nothing about Nikon!) If your budget stretches to a prime lens and you don't want the flexibility of a zoom then buy a prime lens.

I use a 50-500 non DG and as I've said before for what it cost me I rate it very highly. If you can pick up a non DG at a good price I would go for it.

Having been alongside a 170-500 at the weekend it was noticeable that the 50-500 AF was miles quicker than the 170-500 and the HSM motor is silent in comparison, although in the hands of a certain lady from lancashire the 170-500 produces cracking images.

Sigma 50-500's are generally accused of being soft at 500mm but the Coal Tit image I sent you was at 500mm f6.3 in very poor light and doesn't look bad. I'll attach an image from the weekend again at 500mm but this time in better light

Regards

Paul

PS forgot the rest of your thread, I don't recommend using a 2x TC with the 50-500.

paul goode · Mar 7, 2006

Aquila said:
I'm considering buying a Nikon D50 and 500mm lens for bird photography. Nothing fancy or professional, just reasonable shots. Having read through all the posts on BF and reviewed the plethora of lenses, I'm totally confused, especially by all these initials! Any recommendations, especially with regard to maintaining auto-focus? Or is the Tamron better? And what about teleconverters? In a nutshell please!!!
Many thanks.

Hi again Aquila,

Thought I'd better try to explain the DG non DG designation on Sigma lenses. This is to the best of my knowledge!

Sigma recently relaunched most of their lenses with the DG suffix. I believe that this means the coating on the rear element was changed to prevent reflections getting onto the sensor. At the same time the price seemed to go up significantly.

Owning 2 non DG zooms I don't think I've ever noticed reflections being a problem so I would not hesitate to go for a cheaper non DG lens. I seem to remember in another thread though someone raved about the improvements DG gave so I guess other peoples opinions will be valued.

Regards

Paul

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 7, 2006

Paul, I'd say you've guided me through the minefield very expertly. Having see your results, I think my mind is made up. Many thanks for taking the trouble to share your knowledge.
All the best

SMC2002 · Mar 7, 2006

Andy,
I agree with Paul 100%. For the price, the Sigma 50-500mm is a steal. I did notice some softening above 400mms and the 500mm tele end is closer to I believe 465mms. It is a fairly fast focuser and not as hard to handhold as some would lead you to believe. I have gotten some really nice results wide open (F6.3). But, I found that I got much sharper results around F9/F10. Especially, when zoomed in all the way.

I probably shot 10,000 bird images with this lens and was very satisfied with the results. The only reason I sold it was that 750mms (465mm x 1.6X focal length multiplier) just wasn't long enough.

This lens also works great for the occassional sports shot, in good light

Steve

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 8, 2006

Many thanks for that Steve. What make multiplier did you use and how did it affect performance?

paul goode · Mar 8, 2006

Aquila said:
Many thanks for that Steve. What make multiplier did you use and how did it affect performance?

Hi Andy,

I think what Steve is referring to is the difference between film and digital cameras.

On a 35mm film camera a 500mm lens is a 500mm lens.

On a digital camera it isn't quite that simple. The sensors in most digital cameras are smaller than the area of a 35mm film. Therefore the theoretical focal length of the lens is increased, In Nikons terms by 1.5x (i think)

So, you buy a 500mm lens, put it on a D50 and it becomes a 500 * 1.5 = 750mm lens. Good news, a longer lens than you thought!

If thats long enough is another matter.

Regards

Paul

postcardcv · Mar 8, 2006

I'd also agree with Paul that the Sigma 50-500 is a very good lens for the money, and one that I'm sure you wouldn't be disapointed with. However if it's a stretch the 170-500 is also worth looking at. Paul is right that it doesn't focus as fast as the 50-500, but it can still deliver very good results - check out Psilo's gallery for some excellent examples of what this lens can do.

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 8, 2006

postcardcv said:
I'd also agree with Paul that the Sigma 50-500 is a very good lens for the money, and one that I'm sure you wouldn't be disapointed with. However if it's a stretch the 170-500 is also worth looking at. Paul is right that it doesn't focus as fast as the 50-500, but it can still deliver very good results - check out Psilo's gallery for some excellent examples of what this lens can do.

Thanks. Looks like it's about £130 cheaper, but I want something that focuses real fast. In for a penny etc. I would probably spend the extra.

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 8, 2006

paul goode said:
Hi Andy,

I think what Steve is referring to is the difference between film and digital cameras.

On a 35mm film camera a 500mm lens is a 500mm lens.

On a digital camera it isn't quite that simple. The sensors in most digital cameras are smaller than the area of a 35mm film. Therefore the theoretical focal length of the lens is increased, In Nikons terms by 1.5x (i think)

So, you buy a 500mm lens, put it on a D50 and it becomes a 500 * 1.5 = 750mm lens. Good news, a longer lens than you thought!

If thats long enough is another matter.

Regards

Paul

Paul, that is indeed excellent news!

Many thanks

baillieswells · Mar 8, 2006

postcardcv said:
I'd also agree with Paul that the Sigma 50-500 is a very good lens for the money, and one that I'm sure you wouldn't be disapointed with. However if it's a stretch the 170-500 is also worth looking at. Paul is right that it doesn't focus as fast as the 50-500, but it can still deliver very good results - check out Psilo's gallery for some excellent examples of what this lens can do.

I recently purchased a Sigma 170mm-500mm DG lens, you can find my initial assessment elsewhere on the Forum. I chose this lens in preference to the 50mm - 500mm as I didn't want the extra weight, and I already have lenses which cover 50mm to 200mm anyway. My main problem was deciding between the Sigma lens and the Tamron 200mm - 500mm lens. After all that I had read I still couldn't decide which was the better, and I shall probably now never know whether I have made the best choice. Of course one doesn't like to be wrong anyway!

SMC2002 · Mar 8, 2006

SMC2002 said:
Andy,
I probably shot 10,000 bird images with this lens and was very satisfied with the results. The only reason I sold it was that 750mms (465mm x 1.6X focal length multiplier) just wasn't long enough.

Steve

Andy,
As already explained, my camera has a 1.6X multiplier (yours has 1.5X). In your case the Bigma will give you a 35mm field of view eauivilant of about 700mms. So yes you will get even more than the 500mm reach

FWIW, I am now using a shorter prime (400mm) that works well with a teleconverter and gets me out to almost 900mms. Zooms don't work as well with TC's and aren't as sharp wide open as primes.

Steve

DOC · Mar 9, 2006

Sigma 50-500 - great lense , heavy - (need a tripod for tack sharp images ), a bit soft on the long side,great HSM- thus a quite lense, most popular long zoom lense .
Tamron - 200-500- amazing lense , light weight ( 0.5 k"g less than the Bigma )- easily hand held, very sharp, excellent bukeh,no HSM. Not so popular .

No problems whatsoever with autofocus at all ranges .

The Tamron is cheaper . Both lenses are useless with TC's.
I have a D-70+ Tamron 200-500 ( check My gallery for examples )

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 12, 2006

Well after much agonising, I've decided to buy the Sigma 80-400 OS.

I'm very grateful to everyone who's contributed on this thread and in p.m.s and I've also spent a lot of time reading through many threads on

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/

I've come to these conclusions:
- mine is a common dilemma!
- there are all sorts of opinions out there, some of which are contradictory,
so a lot of it probably comes down to the skill and judgment of the operator
- whichever lens I choose, I can find views both for and against that choice
- whatever I buy, it will be easy fo find myself wondering if I'm made the
right choice!
I've decided to go with the image stabiliser, simply because I think it will give me more opportunities.

Now I've got to put all that decision-making behind me and just get on and
enjoy it.

Thanks again.

Keith Reeder · Mar 12, 2006

Good luck, Andy.

Just be patient with the lens and get used to it - it's worth the effort.

One thing I've picked up on is that - like most lenses - it definitely seems happier stopped down a bit.

I'm pretty happy with what I get out of it these days on my D70 - these cormorants are OK, I think...

Just to remove any lingering doubts you might have, browse this page.

Cuckoo-shrike · Mar 12, 2006

YES, some great comments there Keith. If my results begin to approach yours I'll be well chuffed. Thanks again.

Keith Reeder · Mar 12, 2006

If I can do it Andy, anyone can!

Wyvern · Mar 13, 2006

I too made the same decision as you in January. I bought the D50 and ordered (and paid for) the Sigma 80-400 OS - but I'm still waiting delivery of the Sigma lens. Jessops have given various delivery dates which have not been met and they now say Sigma can't give them a date when they will have some in the UK.
I'll be interested to hear if you are successful in obtaining the lens.

Martin

baillieswells · Mar 13, 2006

Wyvern said:
I too made the same decision as you in January. I bought the D50 and ordered (and paid for) the Sigma 80-400 OS - but I'm still waiting delivery of the Sigma lens. Jessops have given various delivery dates which have not been met and they now say Sigma can't give them a date when they will have some in the UK.
I'll be interested to hear if you are successful in obtaining the lens.

Martin

Have you tried Bristol Camera Co. They are usually cheaper than Jessops, and I have always found them very helpful.

Keith Reeder · Mar 14, 2006

Definitely worth a try, but the 80-400mm OS is really thin on the ground, and most shops really struggle to get stock.

Totally confused - which Sigma lens for birding? (1 Viewer)

Well-known member

Well-known member

Attachments

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Super Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Watch the birdie...

Attachments

Well-known member

Watch the birdie...

Member

Well-known member

Watch the birdie...

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread