Posted by szekiat chan on April 23, 2007 at 11:36 AM
Hi, have been offered first refusal for a 500mm f4.5 and am just wondering what would be a good price for it? This is the latest DG version of the lens. The seller is asking for just over £1200 negotiable. Is that too much?
Posted by Paul Gibbs on April 23, 2007 at 12:07 PM
WOW £1200! GET IT!!!!!!!
Its a great lens i bought my non DG and paid £1800 for it in november, and its hardly been off my D200 since i got it back from repair (royal mail decided to introduce it to the floor at high speed).
Posted by Andy Astbury on April 23, 2007 at 12:13 PM
1200 - get it post pronto - the best trade in deal he'll get is around 1500 - 1600 if it's the DG version so its well cheap at 1200.
Absolute workhorse of a lens
Andy
Posted by Andy Shepherd on April 23, 2007 at 12:19 PM
Hi Szekiat,
Two of my friends Glyn and Gary both have this lense and it produces great images
and at £1200 it's an absolute bargain , buy it , buy it now !!!
Kind regards
Andy...
Posted by szekiat chan on April 23, 2007 at 12:44 PM
does the fact that its a canon mount make it cheaper? It looks on paper to be a good traveling lens.
I love mine and I would go for £1200 a bargain as long as its in good nick.
Posted by szekiat chan on April 23, 2007 at 3:46 PM
paul, when u know what i currently attempt to travel with, ie a super trekker loaded with a 300-800, 70-200, converters and a 16-35 and 2 flashes. The 500 at 3+kg is almost light weight......
Posted by Trevor Wilson on April 23, 2007 at 4:04 PM
szekiat, ok vs the monster it is a light/ small lens. I would think of the 50-500 as being more of a travel lens though... with maybe an 18-50 too. I'm currently trying to find my prefect tweener lens, between my 500 and my excelent 18-35D ED and 28-105D..
Posted by szekiat chan on April 24, 2007 at 11:08 AM
if i pass on this, is anyone keen on it? I'm eyeing a 300 2.8 for forest work so this might have to be passed off....
Posted by szekiat chan on April 24, 2007 at 2:42 PM
sale withdrawn as owner had a change of heart. Sigh...
For £1200, the owner should have their head looked at! For the forest work is 300mm enough? I guess with dense undergrowth 500mm maybe too long?
Posted by szekiat chan on April 24, 2007 at 4:10 PM
haha, with good approach techniques, 300 is more than enough. Under the canopy of a rainforest, u're not likely to get much light so often i'm found shooting at iso800, f2.8 and with a flash to get a decent exposure of 1/30. Also, bashing the forests makes tripods a big no no. Its all handheld or monopod work. good fun though
Posted by szekiat chan on April 24, 2007 at 4:13 PM
here's an example:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/66/189458090_c91161e21f.jpg?v=0
iso800, 1/30 with flash and using the sigmonster. Using a 2.8 lens would have given me amore even exposure over the background
Discussion
14 repliesIts a great lens i bought my non DG and paid £1800 for it in november, and its hardly been off my D200 since i got it back from repair (royal mail decided to introduce it to the floor at high speed).
Absolute workhorse of a lens
Andy
Two of my friends Glyn and Gary both have this lense and it produces great images
and at £1200 it's an absolute bargain , buy it , buy it now !!!
Kind regards
Andy...
http://images.fotopic.net/dl-v2/size=50/quality=90/yj7ndu.jpg
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/66/189458090_c91161e21f.jpg?v=0
iso800, 1/30 with flash and using the sigmonster. Using a 2.8 lens would have given me amore even exposure over the background