I am doing a bit of research at the moment on a number of 500mm plus Sigma lens. I have already bothered you about the Sigma 4.5 500mm and most feel it's a good lens for the money. I was wondering if any of you could comment on the bigger 300-800mm 5.6 and/or the 800mm 5.6. Thanking you all in advance
MJ
Posted by Tim Munsey on February 4, 2008 at 2:00 PM
I've been using the 800mm sigma for 4 years now, its a great piece of kit, here's an example pic http://www.wildphotolife.co.uk/Animals/slides/Hare%2028_01_06_4.jpg
First of all its very sharp and has a fast HSM focus motor. For its focal length its the lightest (4.74Kg) of the super telephoto's being lighter than some 600's, much lighter than the 300-800mm.
I'm sure Phillip will pipe up, his is welded on to his D300 at the moment.
Tim
Posted by Paul Gibbs on February 4, 2008 at 2:34 PM
There is a big thing about the 600mm's and the 800mm lenses, like big field guns thery are hard to wield and not very portable. I know Phillip T (The T is for Tripod arms) has one andeven hand oldds it from time to time, but its more of a SIT and snipe weapon than a range about and bushwack type.
What do you plan on shooting and from where?
Posted by Steve Makin on February 4, 2008 at 2:44 PM
Myself and Andy Astbury also use one, he has one a big strong tripod and I use mine with a double bean bag, for hide work the bean bag is okay but obviously for field work a tripod is essential. In terms of quality it s excellent for sharpness BUT all the usual precautions need to be considered, very shallow depth of field, high shutter speeds etc.
Andy posted a very thorough review just a few weeks back on here, do a search under his name.
Posted by Andy Astbury on February 5, 2008 at 4:44 AM
I really ought to keep quiet over this one at the moment for reasons best known only to me and Tripod Tompkinson, but here goes!
Take no notice of Paul if you want to 'rove around' they are easily manageable - I've walked miles with mine, but a decent t/pod and gimbal that locks are required - these lenses hurt when they smack you in the back of the head 'cos you cheapskated and stuck it on a 393
Mine has developed a 'slight' - (leave it Phil ) - back focus issue and has got to go back to the Sigma A&E dept for a short stay in hospital, but the test shots I did to verify the problem have revealed a sharpness in this lens wide open that I thought was the preserve of Canon 500/600 users only - WRONG
My main gripes about the Sig 300/800 - and I blasted Daniel at Sig for these yesterday - are, 1) QC could be better, 2) no focus limiter - which is stupid as they put one on the 800 prime, and 3) the lens hood supplied is absolutely useless and way too short - you need the 800 prime hood as a minimum.
Having said that - IMHO, if you get one and there is a calibration problem then, if it's new, fixing costs nothing, the lack of a limiter is a pain in the bum but you can live with it, a better hood cost a couple of hundred, and IS/VR is pretty pointless at these lengths.
So, with wide-open sharpness being at least the equal of anything else there's little point in spending 7 grand when you can obtain more magnification and equal optical performance for at least 2 grand less.
No lens of 600mm and over is anywhere near as easy to use as a 500 f4/4.5 irrespective of manufacturer - they are optical 'beasts' that can turn and bite you in the ass if you don't pay attention to what you are doing - flaring, low image contrast and fag paper thin DoF are the three main weapons they use to beat you to death, and that's after you've spent a week in traction after getting used to the weight, and let's not even mention the fact that your wallet is now on life support
They are a steep learning curve and deserve much thought before you make any purchase - don't do anything hasty Michael
Posted by Ian Andrews on February 5, 2008 at 5:27 AM
Andy's description is graphic and some of it is even true!!!
I have had two of the 300-800mm 'Sigmonsters' over the last three years and can attest to their optical quality. The weight is a problem but they can be carried on a tripod over the shoulder quite easily if needed. I used a beanbag on the shoulder to spread the weight a bit.
And they do work better on a beanbag than a tripod. (I use a Manfrotto 055PROB with a 468MGRC4 head for the big stuff).
Biggest gripe... closest focus at 6m and I'd agree with the lack of focus limiter (not used the prime, so didn't realise it was on there.)
Never successfully used one hand held (although a couple of grab shots with it have sold, I wouldn't say they were pin sharp!)
HIH
Ian
Posted by Paul Gibbs on February 5, 2008 at 5:54 AM
"Take no notice of Paul if you want to 'rove around' they are easily manageable - I've walked miles with mine, but a decent t/pod and gimbal that locks are required - these lenses hurt when they smack you in the back of the head 'cos you cheapskated and stuck it on a 393"
Hey, its not my fault i fell up to my waist between two rocks in the snow... also it wasnt due to the 393 i got clubbed... that was purely gravity....
Posted by Andy Astbury on February 5, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Paul - lol
That's as maybe - but a 300/800 weighs about the same as 2 of your 500mm 'weeners' - stick that on a 393 and you'll be bludgeoned to death before you've left the car park
Thanks for the feedback and comments; greatly appreciated. I have been checking out all options as I am continuing my way up the 'lens ladder'. Best glass I have at the moment is the Canon 300mm f4 IS and the incredibly sharp and excellent 70-200mm f4 IS. Both work very well with the 1.4 TC but lack a bit of reach on many occasions. I'm going to have a try out of a second hand non-DG Sigma 500mm 4.5 in a few days time (if the weather would clear up for a few minutes). However, the reach of a 800mm lens on a 1.6x crop body (20D) does appeal to me alot.
I'll keep you posted on progress and more importantly hopefully get some decent shots out if I do get some more reach.
Discussion
8 repliesI am doing a bit of research at the moment on a number of 500mm plus Sigma lens. I have already bothered you about the Sigma 4.5 500mm and most feel it's a good lens for the money. I was wondering if any of you could comment on the bigger 300-800mm 5.6 and/or the 800mm 5.6. Thanking you all in advance
MJ
http://www.wildphotolife.co.uk/Animals/slides/Hare%2028_01_06_4.jpg
First of all its very sharp and has a fast HSM focus motor. For its focal length its the lightest (4.74Kg) of the super telephoto's being lighter than some 600's, much lighter than the 300-800mm.
I'm sure Phillip will pipe up, his is welded on to his D300 at the moment.
Tim
What do you plan on shooting and from where?
Andy posted a very thorough review just a few weeks back on here, do a search under his name.
Take no notice of Paul
Mine has developed a 'slight' - (leave it Phil
My main gripes about the Sig 300/800 - and I blasted Daniel at Sig for these yesterday - are, 1) QC could be better, 2) no focus limiter - which is stupid as they put one on the 800 prime, and 3) the lens hood supplied is absolutely useless and way too short - you need the 800 prime hood as a minimum.
Having said that - IMHO, if you get one and there is a calibration problem then, if it's new, fixing costs nothing, the lack of a limiter is a pain in the bum but you can live with it, a better hood cost a couple of hundred, and IS/VR is pretty pointless at these lengths.
So, with wide-open sharpness being at least the equal of anything else there's little point in spending 7 grand when you can obtain more magnification and equal optical performance for at least 2 grand less.
No lens of 600mm and over is anywhere near as easy to use as a 500 f4/4.5 irrespective of manufacturer - they are optical 'beasts' that can turn and bite you in the ass if you don't pay attention to what you are doing - flaring, low image contrast and fag paper thin DoF are the three main weapons they use to beat you to death, and that's after you've spent a week in traction after getting used to the weight, and let's not even mention the fact that your wallet is now on life support
They are a steep learning curve and deserve much thought before you make any purchase - don't do anything hasty Michael
I have had two of the 300-800mm 'Sigmonsters' over the last three years and can attest to their optical quality. The weight is a problem but they can be carried on a tripod over the shoulder quite easily if needed. I used a beanbag on the shoulder to spread the weight a bit.
And they do work better on a beanbag than a tripod. (I use a Manfrotto 055PROB with a 468MGRC4 head for the big stuff).
Biggest gripe... closest focus at 6m and I'd agree with the lack of focus limiter (not used the prime, so didn't realise it was on there.)
Never successfully used one hand held (although a couple of grab shots with it have sold, I wouldn't say they were pin sharp!)
HIH
Ian
Hey, its not my fault i fell up to my waist between two rocks in the snow... also it wasnt due to the 393 i got clubbed... that was purely gravity....
That's as maybe - but a 300/800 weighs about the same as 2 of your 500mm 'weeners' - stick that on a 393 and you'll be bludgeoned to death before you've left the car park
Thanks for the feedback and comments; greatly appreciated. I have been checking out all options as I am continuing my way up the 'lens ladder'. Best glass I have at the moment is the Canon 300mm f4 IS and the incredibly sharp and excellent 70-200mm f4 IS. Both work very well with the 1.4 TC but lack a bit of reach on many occasions. I'm going to have a try out of a second hand non-DG Sigma 500mm 4.5 in a few days time (if the weather would clear up for a few minutes). However, the reach of a 800mm lens on a 1.6x crop body (20D) does appeal to me alot.
I'll keep you posted on progress and more importantly hopefully get some decent shots out if I do get some more reach.
Cheers
MJ