Sigma Lens ?????? (1 Viewer)

[johnruss]

Have received some great help from Bird Forum folks. I need to enhance my Nikon D50 with a good longer Range lens. I have a 55-200 mm Nikkor lens that is great but there are still those little birds that I want to see in my shots and this lens just can't do it. I have been looking at a 50-500mm Sigma lens it has most of the bells and whistles except the OS. also read the fine review on the 400 mm sigma which does have the OS in the review forum. Now I need some help making up my mind. I can afford one or the other plus a converter 1.4 or 2x???????

 

[Pie Face]

Have received some great help from Bird Forum folks. I need to enhance my Nikon D50 with a good longer Range lens. I have a 55-200 mm Nikkor lens that is great but there are still those little birds that I want to see in my shots and this lens just can't do it. I have been looking at a 50-500mm Sigma lens it has most of the bells and whistles except the OS. also read the fine review on the 400 mm sigma which does have the OS in the review forum. Now I need some help making up my mind. I can afford one or the other plus a converter 1.4 or 2x???????

I have the Sigma 50-500 on m D50. I am very happy with it because unlike the big heavy prime lens it is compact enough not to impede my birding in anyway. I have managed to get some very encouraging handheld shots with this lens, admittedly many of them are "record shots" but even these are sharper than most digiscoped shots. I think the weight and length, when extended, of the 50-500 actually helps you to keep the lens stable. The reason I chose the 50-500 wa because a friend f mine let me have a mint condition one for £400.

Mark

 

[Cuckoo-shrike]

I recently agonised over this choice and eventually went for the 80-400 OS because I wanted to use it hand-held for taking photos on the hoof. I've no regrets. I also bought the Kenko 1.4 converter but I've not tried it out yet.

 

[Keith Reeder]

If the extra of 100mm reach is really the deal-breaker, I'd happliy go with the 50-500mm. It's a superb lens, and probably sharper than the 80-400mm, if your hand-holding technique is good enough to get the best out of it.

But personally I've never found myself wishing for an extra 100mm of reach (an extra 400, maybe..! ) and as an all-round bird photography lens the 80-400mm is really hard to beat.

As I suggest in my review, an HSM motor in the 80-400mm would be nice, and I'd be very surprised if the next version doesn't have it: but the internal AF motor on the Nikon mount version of the lens does a very good (if apparently slightly noisy*) job, and little things like getting into the habit of pre-focussing at roughly the right focal length can make up for the lack of HSM.

In truth though, I don't think I've ever missed a shot purely because of slow focussing - I've missed a few through the lens hunting because I was trying to shoot in a situation where the AF would struggle - that's more down to the camera (and me!) than it is the lens, and most lenses would hunt in those situations.


* I say that the lens is apparently slightly noisy, because when you're taking a shot, your ears are only inches away from the lens.

If you hold the camera down, or at arm's length, and trigger the AF, the sound from the lens is really just a whisper, and there's no way it would disturb any bird you were photographing.