New Sigma 150/600 contemporary (3 Viewers)

KCFoggin said:

Perhaps you need a pair of glasses or a new pair of glasses as I would be quite happy with images such as these.

Click to expand...

I agree that the images are very sharp, albeit a little over sharpened as at 100% you can clearly see sharpening artefacts.

Overall they are very good images. I wish I had the opportunity to shoot so many lovely birds at such a close distance and in good light so often. I must admit that I am very jealous ...

On the other hand you have to admit that the way some members talk about / respond to other members is childish to say at the very least and this is the reason I rarely post in some threads anymore when I have a lot to post about, both photos, comparison reviews etc.

micloi said:

I agree that the images are very sharp, albeit a little over sharpened as at 100% you can clearly see sharpening artefacts.

Overall they are very good images. I wish I had the opportunity to shoot so many lovely birds at such a close distance and in good light so often. I must admit that I am very jealous ...

On the other hand you have to admit that the way some members talk about / respond to other members is childish to say at the very least and this is the reason I rarely post in some threads anymore when I have a lot to post about, both photos, comparison reviews etc.

Click to expand...

Could you please tell me where you can see sharpening artifacts. Honestly have not clue what those are. As I have mentioned, I only use DPP 3 for post. So I set the sharpening usually to 5. It does the whole picture and not just the bird. There are 2 settings in DPP for shaprenig. You can sharpen the RAW and you can sharpen the RGB. The RGB sharpening goes from 0-500. Most are set to about 140-160. I am not saying you are wrong in any way, just trying to learn. I am sure that I would be better off going into Lightroom (which I have and don't use) and sharpening just the bird a bit. Would probably set the bird in image better as well. Normally I take about 30 seconds to a minute to do a picture. Crop it, adjust a few highlights, etc. Only what is in DPP3. If it is not sharp or something is wrong with it I quickly delete it.

Please advise. And again I am in no way being defensive about this and would happily accept your advice.

Edit. I guess you can also sharpen using unsharp mask. I never touch that and just leave it on the default setting. Never touch noise reduction either. Default it is...

hosesbroadbill said:

Could you please tell me where you can see sharpening artifacts. Honestly have not clue what those are. As I have mentioned, I only use DPP 3 for post. So I set the sharpening usually to 5. It does the whole picture and not just the bird. There are 2 settings in DPP for shaprenig. You can sharpen the RAW and you can sharpen the RGB. The RGB sharpening goes from 0-500. Most are set to about 140-160. I am not saying you are wrong in any way, just trying to learn. I am sure that I would be better off going into Lightroom (which I have and don't use) and sharpening just the bird a bit. Would probably set the bird in image better as well. Normally I take about 30 seconds to a minute to do a picture. Crop it, adjust a few highlights, etc. Only what is in DPP3. If it is not sharp or something is wrong with it I quickly delete it.

Please advise. And again I am in no way being defensive about this and would happily accept your advice.

Edit. I guess you can also sharpen using unsharp mask. I never touch that and just leave it on the default setting. Never touch noise reduction either. Default it is...

Click to expand...

I did not write this in an offensive manner so I am really happy you took it in the way it was meant.
I think the best way to explain what I mean is if you send me, by private message, a RAW file of one of the birds (i.e. https://www.flickr.com/photos/120553232@N02/19152318715/in/dateposted-public/)
You could use dropbox to share it?

I can then edit it myself and post (or send to you privately if you prefer) an 100% crop to see the difference between an edited photo with sharpening artefacts and one with none. I am also happy to give you some tips, if you wish me to, that can improve your editing even more.

Best,

Michael

the black fox said:

Isaac All those shots are extremely soft and over enhanced ,yet you have the cheek to rip into other people's shots ,.i also think that you link to Flickr just to get your viewing numbers up on there . About time the mods did something about your vitriol it's getting boring now

Click to expand...

Come on.... You can have your opinion about Isaac and say anything about it, but the photos he shares with us are the best. I dare say, the best I've seen with either Sigmas anywhere

Isaac kindly send 2 raw files which I edited and he agreed to post the results. Discarding colour differences, probably because of my monitor's calibration, you can see below the sharpening artefacts I mentioned when crops of the same image are put side by side. I explained my processing steps to Isaac in case he wants to try a different way of editing/sharpening:

My edit is on the left:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6274cz9tuwuxq9n/sharpening artefacts 1.jpg

My edit is on the right:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/00vvdkn3tk9ksi0/sharpening artefacts 3.jpg

MiguelM said:

Come on.... You can have your opinion about Isaac and say anything about it, but the photos he shares with us are the best. I dare say, the best I've seen with either Sigmas anywhere

Click to expand...

Thanks. I have tried and will continue to always try and give a fair analysis of my shots and others with this lens.

Michael shold be posting soon some of my shots that I sent to him that he processed in a different manner. Could be educational as to how one RAW yields different results when processed differently.

Think it would be best if he did so and explained exactly what his settings were and how he did it and I will do the same. If people are looking at these shots to judge the lenses performance then this exercise could help.

micloi said:

Isaac kindly send 2 raw files which I edited and he agreed to post the results. Discarding colour differences, probably because of my monitor's calibration, you can see below the sharpening artefacts I mentioned when crops of the same image are put side by side. I explained my processing steps to Isaac in case he wants to try a different way of editing/sharpening:

My edit is on the left:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/6274cz9tuwuxq9n/sharpening artefacts 1.jpg

My edit is on the right:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/00vvdkn3tk9ksi0/sharpening artefacts 3.jpg

Click to expand...

Cool. Could you also post the final image of both and list what you did. I will do the same.

My edits:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/x4v9obg1a0h42n9/my edit.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/tghoz031idztbjz/my edit 2.jpg

Isaac's edits:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/2m10sck9pzztstc/your edit.jpg

https://www.dropbox.com/s/8ti03hd4aj80yzs/your edit 2.jpg

I follow this workflow for my edits:

Open the raw files in Adobe Camera Raw and do some brightness adjustments (shadows, highlights)

Open the file in photoshop where I use unsharp mask (radius 0.8, Threshold 3, Amount depending on the photo)

And then, if needed, apply noise reduction only on the background using either a custom selection or a mask.

micloi said:

I follow this workflow for my edits:

Open the raw files in Adobe Camera Raw and do some brightness adjustments (shadows, highlights)

Open the file in photoshop where I use unsharp mask (radius 0.8, Threshold 3, Amount depending on the photo)

And then, if needed, apply noise reduction only on the background using either a custom selection or a mask.

Click to expand...

Good stuff. Curious what others think. I think your edits look good. You have superior processing skills to mine and the backgrounds with less noise are clearly evident in your work. Although I do think there are problems with the edits, I appreciate the time spent and the final result and think this confirms for me that I have much to learn about post. But also just how good this lens is and what a great value it is.

Just a few for instances:

The Oystercatcher in your edit has more details in the blacks cause it looks like you lightened the whole bird. That part is nice but by doing that you have blown out some of the whites on the flanks and the back near the tail and to my taste put too much highlights on the back of the legs. To me these birds are really hard to get right. I know what they look like in the field and that is an advantage. The back is a brownish red, the head and neck deep black, the bill a glowing orange and the belly and below is bright white. I think a combination of our 2 edits might be best. One that has less highlights on the bird but also less noise and sharpening artifacts in the background.

As discussed offline with you, the coloration on the Plover to me is off. Bird is too orangish, beak is too yellow at the base and legs too yellow, too much highlights on the cheek which is blown out on yours. These are sandy brown birds. Blend in almost perfectly with the beach. Again these are very hard birds to get right. Not saying I did a perfect job. The bright sun and the sand mess with the sensor. I shot this at ISO 400 with -1/3 ev. Then in post brought down the brightness in DPP to -17. I left all highlights and shadows alone. I upped the saturation to 1 as I felt that my photo was a bit washed out. Kept the white balance on auto as I feel it did the best job at rendering accurate colors. Also not sure if the upload worked properly. Both yours and mine look pixalated. Much more so than they should.

So the 2 of us now have a dropbox set up. Anyone else want to join our group and add their raw shots to it? I think it would be fascinating to see someone elses shot. See how they posted it and see if I processed it in the way that I do how it would come. Not that one would be better but I could see it on my monitor, processed how I do it and then judge performance, sharpness, etc. Seems especially valuable to those still on the fence about this lens.

This is really helpful and I think micloi & Isaac have really helped to get this thread back on track.
I have to say Isaac that I thought your Oystercatcher shot was more to my taste but micloi's Plover was a touch sharper and more appealing to my taste...it really is a matter of choice though as they are both good images.
Well done guys, let's try and keep this friendly and helpful critique going for all our sakes after all, we're all here for the same reasons....trying to make a silk purse out of a sows ear in my case!!!

Isaac

Well done ! I would love to have a look at the two raw files and could give you a Lightroom post process method for you to try.

Could you pm me the Dropbox details. It would also test my idea of posters making RAW files available.

Steve

Hi,

it's been quiet in this topic for a few days now...
I hope there are no angry feelings towards anyone, overhere.
Because there are still others who need all the help they can get...
Me...??
Isaac (and others), how are your settings about Auto Focus when you want to make pics of birds in flight?
If there are Nikon boys and girls... Please write your settings here.
I'm struggling. is that normal...?
Or am I to old... :eek!:

Ad B

Hi,

Today, I went back to the stork family.
The young stork lives in one nest, the parents in a second (two room flat...?)
The parents lives about 30 mtr from the kid.

Ad B

Hi Ad B.
You have to make your own settings to get the best out of it. I have had the C a week now and I have not yet gotten to where I am satisfied, but I am getting closer. I know some doesn't have the dock and still getting perfect pictures, but I had to make adjustment or else my pictures looked awful. I have used Dottune at first and then makes minor adjustment after looking through pictures taken at different distances. You also have to remember as others already has said, get closer to get better pictures, all in respect for the birds.

tommybj said:

Hi Ad B.
You have to make your own settings to get the best out of it. I have had the C a week now and I have not yet gotten to where I am satisfied, but I am getting closer. I know some doesn't have the dock and still getting perfect pictures, but I had to make adjustment or else my pictures looked awful. I have used Dottune at first and then makes minor adjustment after looking through pictures taken at different distances. You also have to remember as others already has said, get closer to get better pictures, all in respect for the birds.

Click to expand...

@ tommybj

May I ask.. what camera are you using with your Contemporary lens?

Cheers..

jshen808 said:

@ tommybj

May I ask.. what camera are you using with your Contemporary lens?

Cheers..

Click to expand...

I'm using Nikon D7100.

tommybj said:

I'm using Nikon D7100.

Click to expand...

@ tommybj

For your D7100 camera, please try this, set you camera's image size setting down to 4800x3200 (15.36mp). On your lens, set the micro adjustment on focus to defaults (all "0"). Then take some test pictures, and see if your results are better. Please give it a try okay

Cheers, John

jshen808 said:

@ tommybj

For your D7100 camera, please try this, set you camera's image size setting down to 4800x3200 (15.36mp). On your lens, set the micro adjustment on focus to defaults (all "0"). Then take some test pictures, and see if your results are better. Please give it a try okay

Cheers, John

Click to expand...

@John
I'll try that and get back, thanks ;-)

I have not visited this thread for several weeks now but glancing at some of the post on this page it seems as if the act of shameless self-promotion and one-upmanship is still very much prevalent. It is such a shame that many BirdForum photo forums has degraded to this these days. It use to be such a good source of information for us novices with regards to honest advice and encouragement from good photographers but most of those experts have long since given up on the site. The little I know about photography has been mostly obtained from BF and for that I am most grateful but for me these days it is a big turn off I am afraid.
Anyway back to what I think this thread should be about and that is giving unbiased thoughts about the Sigma 150-600 C lens. I have now had this lens long enough to finalise my thoughts on it. For the money I think it is a very nice lens but for my style of bird snapping it is very limiting. The two biggest cons for me are the slow aperture and lack of fine detail for shots where the bird is small in the frame.
The f6.3 means that the bokeh is often not nice unless the background is a fair way off and having to further stop down to f8 at the long end does not help this either. The wide open aperture also restricts the light needed for fast and precise AF - when you consider that a f4 lens lets in more than double the amount of light and an f2.8 lens more than four times the light it is little wonder that you need decent light with this lens - something I often struggle to get. Having to shoot at f8 also means that you have to up the ISO past the comfort level at times (although in this respect I often turn to the FF cam when the light is not so good as it handles high ISO noise better).
The lack of fine detail when the bird is very small in the frame is to do with the optical quality of the glass I would have thought but for the comparatively cheap price of the lens it would be unfair to expect it to be up to the best lenses from Canon or Nikon.
I have found that providing you have good light and can get fairly close to the bird then the lens works OK but in poorer light and/or where the bird is small in the frame then results are somewhat wanting. To this end I have decided to sell the lens.
Attached is one of the last shots I got with the lens which was taken in good light with a nice background and think think the result was not too bad - although maybe not up to some folks standards for sure. As this is not cropped that much I could put out a higher res shot but for me if it does not look right at 'normal' web sizes then it is not worth showing anyway.
BTW I am sure a few will need to throw some abuse at this post and to this end I will not be back to see it so carry on if it makes you feel better.