Len quality? I am asking a question about a lens I have found at a great used price. I have not read anything about it on UHH and trust this site (the HOGs) above most sites for advice...

Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum

Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰

Len quality?

Oct 21, 2015 16:09:30 #

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

I am asking a question about a lens I have found at a great used price. I have not read anything about it on UHH and trust this site (the HOGs) above most sites for advice and knowledge.

Is this lens, Sigma Zoom Telephoto 170-500mm f/5-6.3 APO DG Aspherical Autofocus Lens for Canon EOS , a decent lens for our photography? I trust Sigma's quality, and have owned them in the past for my 35mm cameras. One thing I have found out is that digital photography with its ability to enlarge a "negative (image)" far beyond what I used to do in the darkroom days shows any shortcoming a lens may have. So what do the HOGs say about this lens.

Thanks in advance, Greg

Oct 21, 2015 16:50:29 #

Leitz Loc: Solms

CLF wrote:

I am asking a question about a lens I have found a... (show quote)

Also try Google. I take these reviews with a grain of salt, but here's one:

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/3668519624/sigma-170-500mm

Oct 21, 2015 17:08:24 #

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Leitz, thanks for the link. I have not been to that sight in a long time (7 months or so) and will use it more often.

Again, thanks, Greg

Oct 21, 2015 17:51:43 #

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

If you got it real cheap and its clean and haze free, hey what the heck, 170-500 is a lot of reach. It doesn't focus as fast as todays AF lenses and no IS or VC or OS or whatever you call it but with ample light, it will produce decent images. I've got Canon EF lenses older than a Sigma 170-500 and they still perform like new, but then they have a red band on them. Sigma's quality has greatly improved in the past 10 years and their current offering similar in reach to the 170-500, the 150-600S is, for the money, a fantastic lens, a bit heavy but still worth the cost. But then the new one costs new about 2 times what the old 170-500 did. Again, if it's clean, works and you got it cheap, enjoy, you can take some nice shots with it...

Oct 21, 2015 18:00:40 #

Leitz Loc: Solms

CLF wrote:

Leitz, thanks for the link. I have not been to that sight in a long time (7 months or so) and will use it more often.

Again, thanks, Greg

I have no experience with this particular lens, but have positive feelings towards Sigma in general.

Oct 22, 2015 06:58:50 #

Carlo Loc: Maryland, NW.Chesapeake Bay

I have a Sigma 150-500mm and 2 other Sigma lenses. I have been Very pleased with the quality of the images I get with the 150-500mm. I have not enlarged beyond 11x14....that size seems to be fine though.

Oct 22, 2015 07:12:52 #

CLF Loc: Raleigh, NC

Thanks to all of the help on this "GAS" attack. I have decided to wait until I can get what I have been saving up the dollars for. What I have now will need to do what I want. It is far better to wait for one's first choice rather than compromise.

Again, thanks for all the input, posted and PM'd. Greg

Oct 22, 2015 07:24:01 #

Carlo Loc: Maryland, NW.Chesapeake Bay

Agree, Curious as to what your first choice is...!??

Oct 22, 2015 10:06:46 #

Al Beatty Loc: Boise, Idaho

Hi Greg,

I looked into this lens (for Nikon) a few weeks ago and what I read was it was sharp up to 400mm and a little soft from 400 to 500mm. I do not have this lens so I am only referencing what I've read in reviews. Take care & ...

Oct 22, 2015 12:51:29 #

stan0301 Loc: Colorado

its a good lens--if--you put it on a tripod that would be strong enough to support you, use a cable release and be sure no sun is hitting the lens--past that you'll do fine
Stan

If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.

Main Photography Discussion

Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections

UglyHedgehog.com - Forum