-
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.
Cheaper and compatibility (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter mrsbell
- Start date
john-henry
Well-known member
Sigma is a proper make just not made to such a high standard as Canon and Nikon lenses and of course are nowhere near as expensive.
Their lenses have a good reputaton for value for money and are made for those who don't need professional quality in their photography.
Thank you john-henry, when you say "for those who don't need professional quality in their photography" do you mean like me perhaps, like I want to take good photo's but am an amateur. I know what I'm trying to say lol Erm like I'm assuming theyre still very good lenses for what I would be lookig for?
stevetb
Registered user
Sigma lenses are still of a very high quality, and certain lenses will come close to the canon and nikon equivalents - lenses such as the 500 f/4.5 are professional quality.
As with any company, there is a range - obviously some lenses are far better than others. Lenses such as the 135-400 are great starter lenses, but the newer zooms were a little dissapointing in some aspects, and as such you'd probably be better off saving for the more popular canon/nikon options, should you have a canon/nikon body. As for compatibility - sigma lenses are made in different fits for different camera bodies, so yes, more compatible - but the fit is not universal - you need to buy one for your type of camera. E.g Canon fit for a canon cam.
As with any company, there is a range - obviously some lenses are far better than others. Lenses such as the 135-400 are great starter lenses, but the newer zooms were a little dissapointing in some aspects, and as such you'd probably be better off saving for the more popular canon/nikon options, should you have a canon/nikon body. As for compatibility - sigma lenses are made in different fits for different camera bodies, so yes, more compatible - but the fit is not universal - you need to buy one for your type of camera. E.g Canon fit for a canon cam.
I see so you get sigma canon fit and sigma nikon fit etc etc?
rezMole
Well-known member
Actually, some Sigma lenses are regarded by many as being "better" than Canon or Nikon equivalents e.g the Sigma 150mm f2.8 Macro lens. Generally the build quality of many Sigma lenses is very good - there are some cheaper Canon and Nikon lenses that are really quite bad in build quality, and image quality!
I have used / owned a variety of Nikon, Sigma and Tamron lenses in the past and the worst one of all (for build and image quality) was a Nikon lens (a cheap 70-300mm G series).
Finally, yes, Sigma lenses come in a variety of fittings - this helps them to keep unit costs down. Note that Sigma lenses have just suffered from quite high price hikes, but still remain good value for money.
Last edited:
David Smith
Warrington Lancs
Just to add to the comments made:-
Companies like Sigma or Tamron specialise in making lenses and will make them to fit Canon. Nikon & Pentax etc.. They will therefor have a bigger range of lenses than say Canon and could fill a gap in the market for a particular size/aperture combination
Companies like Canon make lenses AND cameras but only make lenses for their own cameras.
GENERALLY it is accepted that a Canon lense will be better built/better quality than say Sigma but (as has been pointed out) certain Sigma lenses are rated as better that the Canon equivilent.
If you google something like "canon Vs Sigma" or "Canon Vs 3rd party lenses" it brings up some interesting information.....but remember its very subjective and could be biased to the writer.
Companies like Sigma or Tamron specialise in making lenses and will make them to fit Canon. Nikon & Pentax etc.. They will therefor have a bigger range of lenses than say Canon and could fill a gap in the market for a particular size/aperture combination
Companies like Canon make lenses AND cameras but only make lenses for their own cameras.
GENERALLY it is accepted that a Canon lense will be better built/better quality than say Sigma but (as has been pointed out) certain Sigma lenses are rated as better that the Canon equivilent.
If you google something like "canon Vs Sigma" or "Canon Vs 3rd party lenses" it brings up some interesting information.....but remember its very subjective and could be biased to the writer.
mike from ebbw
Well-known member
Both my long lenses are Sigma and I find them perfectly adequate for my needs.I have just bought a Sigma 28-300mm too as a general lens (landscapes/portraits etc) and am over the moon with it!
Big :t: for Sigma from me!
Deary me! perhaps I am getting into something way too complex for me!
I don't know what to get, what lense to get or what make.
I know what you mean about bias too David smith as it seems whoever I talk to amongst friends etc, it depends on "their" make of camera as to what is best! I would like an unbias opinion for me and my needs if you see what I mean.
What subject would be best to post in re: the above as I really just want to know what is suitable for me on a budget being an amateaur photographer :-C
I don't know what to get, what lense to get or what make.
I know what you mean about bias too David smith as it seems whoever I talk to amongst friends etc, it depends on "their" make of camera as to what is best! I would like an unbias opinion for me and my needs if you see what I mean.
What subject would be best to post in re: the above as I really just want to know what is suitable for me on a budget being an amateaur photographer :-C
LOL thanks! I need to learn all about these mm too but everyday im picking up something else!
john-henry
Well-known member
It's always difficult to know what equipment to get when you first start out, perhaps if you gave an idea of your budget a few more specific answers would be given as to the more suitable cameras and lenses to suit your pocket.
For my 2pennyworth a Canon 400d or 450d camera, very good price at the moment, smallish and light to fit a womans' hands would be worth considering and a mid-range zoom (somewhere between 135mm - 400mm) lens from one of the independent makers - Sigma, Tamron etc.
Hopefully a few others will add their suggestions when you give an idea of how much you want to spend to get yourself started..
For my 2pennyworth a Canon 400d or 450d camera, very good price at the moment, smallish and light to fit a womans' hands would be worth considering and a mid-range zoom (somewhere between 135mm - 400mm) lens from one of the independent makers - Sigma, Tamron etc.
Hopefully a few others will add their suggestions when you give an idea of how much you want to spend to get yourself started..
Thank you John-Henry.
Ok, I would like to spend no more than £500 for the body and a lense to suit my needs.
I have 2 kids so I'd like to be able to take pics of them and I really want to beable to get far enough away to take wildlife (and landscapes ideally) I just want something versatile that would kinda see me through until I saved up some more money to get more lenses.
I am happy to buy second hand (for my budget I think this is probably the only option)
I also wondered where most people bought there equipment (second hand)
Oh and am i ok to put this in here or should I put it somewhere else?I just don't want to get into trouble!
Oh and just one more q! Is the 100 range better than the likes of the 30d for example is the Canon 4000D better than the canon 40d? I get confused as to which model is actually the newer ones ? Or is the nikon D100 better than the Nikon D40/60?
Ps I was advised to get a Nikon D100 but it only has 6.1 megapixels and I thought if I could afford something with more MP that would be advisable?
Ok, I would like to spend no more than £500 for the body and a lense to suit my needs.
I have 2 kids so I'd like to be able to take pics of them and I really want to beable to get far enough away to take wildlife (and landscapes ideally) I just want something versatile that would kinda see me through until I saved up some more money to get more lenses.
I am happy to buy second hand (for my budget I think this is probably the only option)
I also wondered where most people bought there equipment (second hand)
Oh and am i ok to put this in here or should I put it somewhere else?I just don't want to get into trouble!
Oh and just one more q! Is the 100 range better than the likes of the 30d for example is the Canon 4000D better than the canon 40d? I get confused as to which model is actually the newer ones ? Or is the nikon D100 better than the Nikon D40/60?
Ps I was advised to get a Nikon D100 but it only has 6.1 megapixels and I thought if I could afford something with more MP that would be advisable?
Last edited:
john-henry
Well-known member
Afraid I don't know much about the Nikon camera range but regarding Canon a s/h 30d is a good camera although a few years old now, the only ones in your price range are going to be the 400d, 450d and the 1000d and apart from the 1000d (I found one, body only, for £310) will have to be s/h, I've just looked through a few sites and am amazed how much cameras, and lenses, have gone up due to the weak pound etc. As an example I bought a 400d body about 12 months ago and they're now 50% dearer!!
I'm sorry to say it looks like the only way you're going to get kitted out is the s/h route.
There are some good buys that come up on the For Sale section of this forum, I should keep my eye on it and also anywhere else you know that sells s/h equipment.
good luck
John
I'm sorry to say it looks like the only way you're going to get kitted out is the s/h route.
There are some good buys that come up on the For Sale section of this forum, I should keep my eye on it and also anywhere else you know that sells s/h equipment.
good luck
John
Thanks John, I apreciate that. I knew s/h would be my only option but am happy with that for the moment, it's just the best deal
What is the newer model from the range you mentioned before? The canon 1000d got which? best buy Hopefully they'll make their way back down in the next month or so when I have enough to by one LOL
Kay
stevetb
Registered user
Hi again,
I think you're best bet is to trawl through similar threads, see what people tend to do, read up some more on jargon etc.
If i'm not mistaken a D100 is a very old camera.
I reckon that you're best bet would be a nice 2ndhand 400D or 450D, with a sigma 135-400mm. Great lens, sharp when you know how but a bit slow to focus.
For a secondhand camera, try here:
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=26&category_filter=20
I think you're best bet is to trawl through similar threads, see what people tend to do, read up some more on jargon etc.
If i'm not mistaken a D100 is a very old camera.
I reckon that you're best bet would be a nice 2ndhand 400D or 450D, with a sigma 135-400mm. Great lens, sharp when you know how but a bit slow to focus.
For a secondhand camera, try here:
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=26&category_filter=20
Hi AC/DC,
Yes the D100 is an old model and only 6.1 MP. I believe there is now the D200 D300 D700 and even D900 as well!! But you're still talking £260 s/h for it. Is that expensive for what it is?
rezMole
Well-known member
I had a D70 which was only 6.3 MP, and it was a great camera - served me well for at least two years until i upgraded to a D300. Don't let the apparently low MP count put you off a camera. For £500 you will be severly limited to what you can afford - especially when it comes to getting a lens! But you should be able to get something decent on your budget, secondhand - I sold my D70 complete with a Tamron 200-500mm lens for £500. You will ideally need something at or above 400mm for bird photography.
mikfoz
It's not a competition. Watch the birdy!
I've used several Sigma lenses over the years and they're fine lenses indeed.
Some of the people coming out with comments like "not for professional use" are possibly reverse-justifying overspending on their own kit. For the vast majority of keen amateurs Sigma offers one hell of a versatile range of great value and good quality lenses that are not cheap and cheerful cack as some would have you believe.
Some of the people coming out with comments like "not for professional use" are possibly reverse-justifying overspending on their own kit. For the vast majority of keen amateurs Sigma offers one hell of a versatile range of great value and good quality lenses that are not cheap and cheerful cack as some would have you believe.
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
I agree with this, I have had Sigma lenses in the past and was fairly pleased with them but then I made a fatal mistake and bought a Canon 'L' lens, after you do this there is no turning back, it will cost you a bucket of loot as you buy more Canon L's. Needless to say the siggy's have all gone now.
Let this be a warning to you - If you have a Sigma that you are pleased with do not be tempted to try a Canon 'L'
BTW there are some Sigma's that I would be happy with like the 150 macro and 500/4.5 but that's about it for me.
oncebittern
Steve Sheehan
For what its worth, I was in a similar place about 6 months back, and this is my experience:
Firstly, I bought a 10mp Nikon D80 body. Not the newest camera around, but still fairly up to date, and with VR (Nikon's version of image stabilisation). Still learning how to use it properly, but perfectly happy with it for now. Cost me £200 2nd hand.
Next up was a lens, and I bought a Nikon 70-300 zoom. Nice and sharp, but it didn't give me the reach I wanted, so that got sold. I think it cost me around £80.
After some research and loads of advice in another thread here, I opted for a Sigma 170-500 zoom, which I've been using for a couple of months now. Quite an old lens, and without some of the features that are standard on more modern ones, but I'm very happy with it, and at £220, I won't be complaining about price!
Also just picked up a Sigma 18-50 wide angle zoom, and again, I'm very happy with it - for just £40
So all in all, I would say just go for it. The beauty of buying 2nd hand, is that if you find you don't like what you've bought, you can probably sell it on for what it cost you. This allows you to 'experiment' a bit, without the worry that you might be pouring money down the drain.
BTW, all my purchases were either through BF's own For Sale threads, or ebay.
Good luck.
Steve.
Firstly, I bought a 10mp Nikon D80 body. Not the newest camera around, but still fairly up to date, and with VR (Nikon's version of image stabilisation). Still learning how to use it properly, but perfectly happy with it for now. Cost me £200 2nd hand.
Next up was a lens, and I bought a Nikon 70-300 zoom. Nice and sharp, but it didn't give me the reach I wanted, so that got sold. I think it cost me around £80.
After some research and loads of advice in another thread here, I opted for a Sigma 170-500 zoom, which I've been using for a couple of months now. Quite an old lens, and without some of the features that are standard on more modern ones, but I'm very happy with it, and at £220, I won't be complaining about price!
Also just picked up a Sigma 18-50 wide angle zoom, and again, I'm very happy with it - for just £40
So all in all, I would say just go for it. The beauty of buying 2nd hand, is that if you find you don't like what you've bought, you can probably sell it on for what it cost you. This allows you to 'experiment' a bit, without the worry that you might be pouring money down the drain.
BTW, all my purchases were either through BF's own For Sale threads, or ebay.
Good luck.
Steve.
Similar threads
