Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

New Toy - Sigma 150-500
#1

Just picked it up today. Did some tests as Matthew suggested. Taped a page of a glossy add (about paperback size) to a waste bin outside of our building (estimate about 15 m). At that point the add filled less than quarter of the captured image @ 500 mm. Tripod, cable shutter release, fully opened aperture. Stabilization off. The paperback-sized font was easily readable and fairly well defined, whether the text was placed in the center of the image or in the upper left corner. In subsequent shots I came closer and closer, until I was at minimal focusing distance. The image quality improved significantly as I got closer.

I also tested the hand hold ability. With stabilisation on and @ 500 mm and 1/1000 (f/8) sec, the lens produced a clear sharp image. At 1/30 of a sec (good posture, holding breath but no physical support), the photo was useable (?) but not "crisp". Did not test other settings.

The lens is heavy and big but fairly comfortable to hand-hold. There is some hunting and I ended up in frustration using manual focus some of the time.

This is by far the most expensive single photo item in my possession after the D 300 camera. It took me about a year to bite the bullet. I hope that I will make a good use of the lens, that it will be good enough and that I will learn the ways to use it effectively. It is going to be my lens of choice for the ZOO photography. I plan to go weekly till the spring.

I plan to try hand-holding, tripod and monopod (which I do not have). How much do I need to pay for a monopod that would give me adequate stability when I do not use a tripod?

Thanks

Pavel

Please see my photos at http://mullerpavel.smugmug.com (fewer, better image quality, not updated lately)
or at http://www.flickr.com/photos/pavel_photophile2008/ (all photos)
Reply
#2

Congratulations. I wouldn't mind seeing a picture of that lens mounted on your D300.
Reply
#3

I'm glad that you're liking it - it sounds like the performance is quite good. I'm a little surprised that it gets better as you get closer, but I'm not sure why that surprises me. The image stabilization sounds very effective - 1/30 is very, very slow for that long a lens. I'm impressed that you're getting anything that's not just a smear at that sort of speed.

Pavel Wrote:How much do I need to pay for a monopod that would give me adequate stability when I do not use a tripod?
Lunch, somewhere cheap?

I have a Manfrotto 'Digi' 676B, which is a lightweight 4-section pod rated for 10lbs. It's a textbook case of "I'm not using it anymore" - it had fallen down behind my desk, and I never missed it. I have another one that I use instead. You're welcome to it if you're not in a rush.

A better tripod would be something like the Manfrotto 679 or 680; they're strong enough to use as hiking poles, and run about $70-80. I'm sure there are many that are strong enough, but those are the standards by which others are measured.

matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Reply
#4

Matthew I am free tomorrow lunch - can come to the store and bring the toy.

At this point do not have the sky filter - plan to go on line. Will get Manfrotto 679 or 680 or equivalent. Want something not too, too heavy but strong. My tripod seems adequate.
Thanks for the advice Matthew. Let me know by e-mail or call tomorrow (anytime after 8:30 AM), but make shure you give me time to plan to get downtown.

P

Please see my photos at http://mullerpavel.smugmug.com (fewer, better image quality, not updated lately)
or at http://www.flickr.com/photos/pavel_photophile2008/ (all photos)
Reply
#5

I have the Sigma 50-500 and have had it 3-4 years and love it... Mine sits happily atop a $15 monopod and $7 ballhead, both are from Ebay. The monopod is a manfrotto clone.
Reply
#6

#1 about the Manfrotto, though I'd recommend avoiding carbon-graphite lighter ones. Make sure the head you use is reasonably heavy-duty, as a flimsyish one will negate the stability of a chunky pod. I ruined several shots last year in this way, when the Image Stabilisation handheld did a better job than Mr Manfrotto did at 400mm. Interesting about the shutter speed: I've got away with 1/6s handheld at 70mm, but the output was really only suitable for web. 1/30s at 150-200 seems perfectly do-able for similar expectations(no mention of ISO here!...) but hats off if you got that at 500mm!

All my stuff is here: www.doverow.com
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6mU6qaNx08
Reply
#7

Congratulations Pavel for your new toy... Smile you were so much looking forward to have that lens...

I am very happy for you!

Can't wait to see your pictures from the Zoo... Wink

A work of art which did not begin in emotion is not art.
Paul Cezanne
Reply
#8

Thank you all for kind comments - I hope that something useful will come of my purchase. So far, besides further playing it only lead to further expense. I bought a UV filter on-line (B+W, MRC coated) and I researched on-line how to use monopods and which one to get. As I am not prepared to pay $ 300 for monopod, I will go with Matthew's recommendation and go with Manfrotto (perhaps 681B?). I will use my Manfrotto ball head from my tripod, which seems to be OK on the tripod with my new gear. Until I break down and buy another head, I will just switch heads between the tripod and monopod for now (I like to stay married and the lens purchase brought about some rumbling, even though the purchase did not come unexpected). I hope to terrify the ZOO animals with my new lens next week.

Please see my photos at http://mullerpavel.smugmug.com (fewer, better image quality, not updated lately)
or at http://www.flickr.com/photos/pavel_photophile2008/ (all photos)
Reply
#9

My cheapy is a clone of the Manfrotto 680B, it handles the weight just fine.
Reply
#10

The 681B looks like a good choice.

I was thinking about suggesting the Manfrotto 234 swivel head for the monopod; I bought one to cut down the weight of mine, but I do have to confess that I liked using it with the 486 ballhead better. And the 234 is 'only' good for about 5.5 pounds, which is about what your setup must weigh.

I've gotten a chance to play with a gimbal head from a company called Jobu Design, which does its machining in Mississauga. Not quite Wimberly-level stuff, but I was impressed. I had a Canon 1D and a 300/2.8 on one of their lighter models, the almost embarrassingly-named "Black Widow Jr" (link), and it was easy to swivel and quite solid. It's not cheap, but compared to the exotic tripod ball heads, it's not all that expensive either. It might make for a decent tripod head for the Zoo, as well as birds and beasts.

I would love to join you for a day at the zoo this winter. I'll bring the longest focal length that I have: the 210mm on my GX680. We'll look like quite the pair. Big Grin

matthewpiers.com • @matthewpiers | robertsonphoto.blogspot.com | @thewsreviews • thewsreviews.com
Reply
#11

I have only come across one Monopod that I would like. I can't remember the brand, but it was spring loaded with a single hand grip/trigger. You pressed the trigger to unlock and it was similar to a pogo stick. The bottom bit sprung out and you pressed until you had the required height. I seem to remember it being about 30mm diameter.
I see the owner occasionally so I will get the brand next time I catch him.

Lumix LX5.
Canon 350 D.+ 18-55 Kit lens + Tamron 70-300 macro. + Canon 50mm f1.8 + Manfrotto tripod, in bag.
Reply


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread / Author Replies Views Last Post
Last Post by maisie
Oct 6, 2018, 04:55
Last Post by Casey1721
Aug 22, 2017, 02:17

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)