new Sigma 150-600mm lens
Feb 16, 2015 13:33:15 #
oldtool2 wrote:
I bought my lens from a place called Roberts off t... (show quote)
I would second these recommendations. I too got my Sigma Sport from Roberts. Great service.
Feb 16, 2015 14:07:53 #
gtwhogger wrote:
Oldtool2, may I ask why you are shooting your bird pics at ISO 6400? You would get better results down in the 500 to 800 range and still use a shutterspeed that is fast enough to stop the action, all that digital noise voids a valid comparison of IQ comparison
Sure, you can ask anything you want. I had the ISO set on auto when those photos were taken. It was an overcast day. I was hoping to get a fast enough shutter speed to stop or slow down the wing action on a BIF but unfortunately this shutter speed was not fast enough. You've got to remember these are small song birds with very fast wings. This shutter speeds that I got for those photos would've been okay if I were shooting in Osprey or something bigger on that order such as the GBH for a great egret. In order to stop the wings on a small songbird like the ones I were shooting I need to get a shutter speed of 6400 or 8000.
On the Canon 7D2 you can adjust the range for ISO when shooting in auto and I have done so now. At the time I used the camera settings as it came from the factory. The other thing is I wanted to see how well the camera would handle the noise. I didn't use any noise reduction when I post processed those photos but I probably should have.
Jim D
May 4, 2015 17:32:03 #
oldtool2 wrote:
I got my Sigma 150 600 mm lens today. So far, j... (show quote)
The extra weight and cost of the Sigma Sport is a negative for me, but the merits of the Sigma are good.
May 4, 2015 18:50:41 #
tamalero wrote:
speaking of Sigma, I havent heard a single thing of the Contemporary 150-600mm..
Mine arrived today for Canon mount. What would you like to know?
May 4, 2015 19:00:23 #
Revet wrote:
I like both Sigma and Tamron lens. I have both and depending on the lens, I like one over the other. In this case, I think the fair comparison is the current Tamron version with the yet to be released Sigma C version. For myself, I am awaiting that release and the mass of comparisons on the two lens that will follow on all the various websites I look at before I make a purchase.
You obviously haven't been keeping up on current events, pal. The Sigma C has been released and there are several reviews on the web. I got mine today.
May 5, 2015 10:31:17 #
Regis wrote:
The extra weight and cost of the Sigma Sport is a negative for me, but the merits of the Sigma are good.
Regis,
I can understand that. The weight is not so much an issue to me but I can see where the cost would be to a lot of people. I was very fortunate that it wasn't an issue for me right now. In a couple years it may very well be. A few years ago it would've been an issue.
I try to get the best I can at the time. This leaves a grand that my eight kids will not be fighting over when I'm gone.
Jim D
May 6, 2015 02:29:06 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Mine arrived today for Canon mount. What would you like to know?
How heavy does it feels compared to the Tamron? how fast is the AF?
Jim Bob wrote:
You obviously haven't been keeping up on current events, pal. The Sigma C has been released and there are several reviews on the web. I got mine today.
only for the Canon mount.
interestingly, in Europe and Japan.. there seems to be plenty of availability of the Nikon mount version (a few ebayers offering it in italy, germany and Japan).
May 6, 2015 03:43:11 #
washy
Loc: Dorset UK
oldtool2 wrote:
I have tried to use 1.4 X TC's with the Tamron and the Sigma. Both of them hunt in order to achieve autofocus. These lenses were not designed to take a TC and I don't think any of them are going to work well with any TC. There designed as 600 mm lenses and that's about as big as they are going to go and work well.
Jim D
Jim D
A while ago a chap used a Tamron 150-600 with a 2 times and a 1.4 converters to photograph the moon his calculation I believe was around 2250 mm. Obviously though in manual focus and the results were awesome and posted on UHH
May 6, 2015 03:47:45 #
washy
Loc: Dorset UK
oldtool2 wrote:
I took a few photos out the back door with my new ... (show quote)
In the 2nd image the fence is sharper ( more defined ) with the Tamron than the Sigma
May 6, 2015 07:13:04 #
oldtool2 wrote:
I tried for over two years to keep that foot but t... (show quote)
I want you to understand that I can empathize with your medical issues having experienced some of my own. I hope and pray for your speedy recovery, both physically and emotionally.
May 7, 2015 09:20:33 #
Jim Bob wrote:
I want you to understand that I can empathize with your medical issues having experienced some of my own. I hope and pray for your speedy recovery, both physically and emotionally.
Jim,
Thank you and I appreciate your comment. I hope you are not saying that you have had to have an amputation done! Not something I would wish on anyone!
Due to complications it has been 7 months sense my surgery. Last week they were finally able to do an initial casting. With any amount of luck I will be fitted for a prosthetic in the next month. I am on cloud 9 right now! I can't wait to learn to walk again!!
The physical part of this has been tough but to be honest I think the emotional aspect has been worse. Once again, thank you for your well wishes! It is very much appreciated.
One last thing, this was my choice to have the surgery done. I knew it had to be done so had some time to prepare for it. Those I really feel sorry for are our service men that have come back from over seas missing limbs! They had no option at all! They are the ones that deserve our prayers and well wishes! PLEASE DON'T FORGET THEM!!
Jim D
May 7, 2015 10:02:33 #
tamalero wrote:
only for the Canon mount.
interestingly, in Europe and Japan.. there seems to be plenty of availability of the Nikon mount version (a few ebayers offering it in italy, germany and Japan).
interestingly, in Europe and Japan.. there seems to be plenty of availability of the Nikon mount version (a few ebayers offering it in italy, germany and Japan).
Too me, it feels slightly heavier than the Tamron. However, I have not really compared the official weight specs. AF is quick and accurate.
May 7, 2015 10:04:57 #
oldtool2 wrote:
Jim, br br Thank you and I appreciate your commen... (show quote)
Hang in there buddy and know that my prayers go with you and our men and women in service who sacrifice so that we may enjoy this great country of ours.
May 8, 2015 08:52:39 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Too me, it feels slightly heavier than the Tamron. However, I have not really compared the official weight specs. AF is quick and accurate.
The Sigma sport is two pounds heavier than the Tamron. Tamron weighs 4.3 pounds, Sigma sport weighs 6.3 pounds. I figure you need a tripod that will handle roughly 15 pounds minimum (camera and sport lens 9 to 10 pounds X 1.5 = 15 pounds).
Jim D
May 8, 2015 08:53:20 #
Jim Bob wrote:
Hang in there buddy and know that my prayers go with you and our men and women in service who sacrifice so that we may enjoy this great country of ours.
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Jim D
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.