Posted by Mark Green on August 26, 2008 at 4:09 AM
Hi Looking at some feedback from people with experience of these combinations.
I really would like more reach, and the nikon 500mm is obviously a superb lens, but alias it will be a fair while before i could ever afford one.
I have heard that the 300F2.8 + 1.7TC is a killer combination and would give me 510mm. but i have always been Sceptical of using teleconverters.
I would love to see some pics with this combo, and get some feedback and thoughs using this combo.
Mark Green
Posted by Paul Gibbs on August 26, 2008 at 4:18 AM
Where you can always go for a lens without TC. I used to have a 300mm f2.8 and used it with a 2x and though good in that you have a 300mm 420mm and 600mm its still not as good as a 500 or 600mm.
May i recommend the Sigma 500mm f4.5 which is much much cheaper than the Nikkor, esp on the used market?
I totally agree with Paul. Teleconverters are a useful item to have for odd occasions but if you find that you are constantly needing to use a teleconverter then you really need the longer lens. I also agree wholeheartedly with his recommendation of the Sigma 500mm. They are much cheaper than equivalent Nikon / Canon lenses but lack nothing in quality. I too could not afford a Canon 500 (even a used f4.5 version was more than the new Sigma) and so bought mine about six years ago and have absolutely no complaints about it. You will probably be able to buy a new Sigma for less than the price of a Nikon 300/2.8 plus teleconverter. A good secondhand one will be even cheaper.
Robert
Posted by Andy Astbury on August 26, 2008 at 6:30 AM
Never 'bank on' the teleconverter route Mark - no matter what anyone tells you they degrade your image quality.
The 300mm f2.8 is a superb bit of glass, as is the 500mm and the 500mm Sigma.
Hope this helps
Posted by Mark Green on August 26, 2008 at 7:02 AM
cool thanks for the feedback, does anyone have pics from the sigma 500mm ??
Mark
Posted by Paul Gibbs on August 26, 2008 at 7:22 AM
Virtually all of mine (usually with a TC), and many of Phill T's and I think one of the andrews/andy's (edit:just looked Andy Bate i think).
Hello again Mark,
the majority of my images on this forum are taken on either the Sigma 500 or the Sigma 100-300 f4. Just click on my name in the 'posted by' to bring up past images.
Robert
I have been using the 300+1.7tc for about 3 years now,and have ALWAYS!! been very happy with the results.I have also used on the same day the 500mm,and as near as dam it taken the same images with both lens set ups.I have to say that I can see little difference between the two.I have for some time now been contemplating a 600mm,but I will never get rid of the 300mm,as it has given me some first class images..
Hope this is helpful
Stewart.......
Posted by eric weight on August 26, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Can somebody tell me whether the 300 & TC combination will give as good a Bg as the prime lens.
Also where are all these secondhand sig 500s ? I started looking for one (canon fit) about a month ago and found one immediately. I didn't move for it because I figured they would be everywhere and I would be able to pick and choose. I haven't found another since. Am I just looking in the wrong places or being too optimistic/impatient?
BTW Mark, Bob Rigby has a S/H sig 500 nikon fit. http://www.bobrigby.com/used.html Eric
Posted by Marc Langille on August 26, 2008 at 12:58 PM
Hi Mark,
The first three four from the Canon 40D + Sigma 500/4.5:
Note the second last image is 3296x2100, and the last image was cropped down to 2240x 1644 pixels from a 14.6MP image.
Hope that helps!
Cheers,
Marc
Posted by Jeroen Stel on August 26, 2008 at 5:48 PM
I Have owned both a Sigma 300mm F2.8 and the Sigma 500mm F4.5 and use both with 1.7 and 2x teleconverters and must say that both give amazing results with and without teleconverters.
The trick is that you have to use a higher F-number then the coupling of the converter gives you. So instead of shooting at F5.6 with a 300mm F2.8 and 2x converter you have to shoot at F8 or F9 to get reasonable sharpness.
I experience the same with my 600mm F4 when coupled to a 2x converter you would expect sharpness at F8 or F9 but then the iimages are soft as butter but when i go to F11 or F13 i get magnificent results.
No matter if you buy the 300mm F2.8 or the 500mm F4.5 bith lenses will give you great results with converters. I even bought my old 300mm F2.8 back from the guy i sold it to....
You can find a lot of images shot with both Sigma lenses and converters in my older posts or on my website: www.jeroenstel.com.
I also posted a Buzzard shot with the 500mm F4.5 and 1.7 TC from Soligor.
Another plug for the Sigma 500mm f4.5 most of my shots are taken with this lens with or without a Nikon TC14e teleconvertor modified to fit the lens. I also have a 300mm 2.8 and use that with the Nikon TC with very pleasing results Just click on my posts to see examples.
Regards
Ian
Posted by Paul Inglis on August 27, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Hi Mark,
Great interesting replies above!!!
I’m going too tread a slightly different path here! I know we all get hung up in this that and the other with IQ and the like but we sometimes need to put things into perspective!
For example;
I use a 300mm f/4 with a 1.7x TC and it gives me good useable shots! I also use a 600mm f/4 which delivers excellent shots! I can't hand hold the 600mm for more than ten minutes at a time but the 300mm + TC I can hold all day!
Both lenses have a place in my camera bag! I use the tools I need to get a job done rather than getting too hung up on what is best! There are no rights or wrongs! I prefer to use a 300mm f/4 + 1.7x TC for hand holding shots (usually random roaming images) than a 500/600mm prime. If I’m sitting in a hide or on a cliff for any length of time and can use a tripod then I prefer the faster big glass.
To really answer your question though, is a 300mm f/2.8 a good lens? – hell yes! Would I want one? – hell yes! Is a 300mm f/2.8 with a 1.7x TC better than a 500mm f/4 Prime? – hell NO! The 300mm + 1.7x TC = 500mm f/5.6. Not too fast in low light, plus you make that SWM hunt more putting more wear and tear on it shortening it’s lifespan! Also a slight deterioration in IQ is noticeable if you start cropping! Better wreaking a 300mm f/4 I think!
To be honest, if you’re thinking 300mm f/2.8 prime plus TC then you know that you want too head down the long focal length road therefore go straight for the 500mm Prime. If you’re thinking of versatility, then if I were you I’d really consider the 200-400mm f/4 (which I think you’ve got, in which case why the dilemma – no offence).
• 300mm f/2.8 VR is a great bird in flight lens, marco lens (coupled with an extension tube), big mammals.
• 300mm f/4 is a cheap but tack sharp lens offering the above (but no VR)
• 200-400mm f/4 VR superb all-rounder
• 500mm f/4 – good manageable Prime
• 600mm f/4 – My favourite in big glass
• 800mm f/5.6 – Mother of a lens (Good small birding lens)
• 300-800mm – Man wish I was fitter!!!
As for the bokeh, well that depends on your lens, but in my experience, that TC doesn't help you achieve smoother, cleaner BG’s. The 300mm f/2.8 is better than the 300mm f/4, but can anyone say it is really worth it, in terms of money, weight and so forth?
As they say the choice is yours – sorry I wasn’t much help!!!
Discussion
13 repliesI really would like more reach, and the nikon 500mm is obviously a superb lens, but alias it will be a fair while before i could ever afford one.
I have heard that the 300F2.8 + 1.7TC is a killer combination and would give me 510mm. but i have always been Sceptical of using teleconverters.
I would love to see some pics with this combo, and get some feedback and thoughs using this combo.
Mark Green
May i recommend the Sigma 500mm f4.5 which is much much cheaper than the Nikkor, esp on the used market?
Robert
The 300mm f2.8 is a superb bit of glass, as is the 500mm and the 500mm Sigma.
Hope this helps
Mark
Look at my last post for one without.
Or here
http://www.penninephotography.co.uk/p41274662.html
http://www.penninephotography.co.uk/p45659087.html
http://www.penninephotography.co.uk/p48198781.html
http://www.penninephotography.co.uk/p48355780.html
http://www.penninephotography.co.uk/p48355781.html
Hope those help?
Phil.
http://www.wildsnaps.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/goldcerst-d2x-007-sp.jpg
http://www.wildsnaps.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/gannet-d2x-05-bc.jpg
http://www.wildsnaps.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/puffin-d2x-003a-fi.jpg
http://www.wildsnaps.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/water-vole-d200-500mm.jpg
the majority of my images on this forum are taken on either the Sigma 500 or the Sigma 100-300 f4. Just click on my name in the 'posted by' to bring up past images.
Robert
Hope this is helpful
Stewart.......
Also where are all these secondhand sig 500s ? I started looking for one (canon fit) about a month ago and found one immediately. I didn't move for it because I figured they would be everywhere and I would be able to pick and choose. I haven't found another since. Am I just looking in the wrong places or being too optimistic/impatient?
BTW Mark, Bob Rigby has a S/H sig 500 nikon fit. http://www.bobrigby.com/used.html
The first three four from the Canon 40D + Sigma 500/4.5:
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/5507525_dbmxP#337056575_EEwmb-XL-LB
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/5507525_dbmxP#342248294_BG5VN-A-LB
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/5507525_dbmxP#342186304_BJXrJ-XL-LB
Please note there is NO cropping in those images above.
One slightly cropped from the Sigma 500/4.5:
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/3682847_xCMA9#358152504_PCrBv-XL-LB
Pentax K20D & FA 300/2.8 plus various TC's, and some cropping for better:
Kenko 1.5x TC:
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/4969962_wXCP8#358224519_PBwYP-A-LB
Tamron 1.4x TC:
http://www.marclangille.com/gallery/3682847_xCMA9#358158634_KKS9R-XL-LB
Note the second last image is 3296x2100, and the last image was cropped down to 2240x 1644 pixels from a 14.6MP image.
Hope that helps!
Cheers,
Marc
The trick is that you have to use a higher F-number then the coupling of the converter gives you. So instead of shooting at F5.6 with a 300mm F2.8 and 2x converter you have to shoot at F8 or F9 to get reasonable sharpness.
I experience the same with my 600mm F4 when coupled to a 2x converter you would expect sharpness at F8 or F9 but then the iimages are soft as butter but when i go to F11 or F13 i get magnificent results.
No matter if you buy the 300mm F2.8 or the 500mm F4.5 bith lenses will give you great results with converters. I even bought my old 300mm F2.8 back from the guy i sold it to....
You can find a lot of images shot with both Sigma lenses and converters in my older posts or on my website: www.jeroenstel.com.
I also posted a Buzzard shot with the 500mm F4.5 and 1.7 TC from Soligor.
Hope this helps..
Greetings,
Jeroen Stel
Another plug for the Sigma 500mm f4.5 most of my shots are taken with this lens with or without a Nikon TC14e teleconvertor modified to fit the lens. I also have a 300mm 2.8 and use that with the Nikon TC with very pleasing results
Regards
Ian
Great interesting replies above!!!
I’m going too tread a slightly different path here! I know we all get hung up in this that and the other with IQ and the like but we sometimes need to put things into perspective!
For example;
I use a 300mm f/4 with a 1.7x TC and it gives me good useable shots! I also use a 600mm f/4 which delivers excellent shots! I can't hand hold the 600mm for more than ten minutes at a time but the 300mm + TC I can hold all day!
Both lenses have a place in my camera bag! I use the tools I need to get a job done rather than getting too hung up on what is best! There are no rights or wrongs! I prefer to use a 300mm f/4 + 1.7x TC for hand holding shots (usually random roaming images) than a 500/600mm prime. If I’m sitting in a hide or on a cliff for any length of time and can use a tripod then I prefer the faster big glass.
To really answer your question though, is a 300mm f/2.8 a good lens? – hell yes! Would I want one? – hell yes! Is a 300mm f/2.8 with a 1.7x TC better than a 500mm f/4 Prime? – hell NO! The 300mm + 1.7x TC = 500mm f/5.6. Not too fast in low light, plus you make that SWM hunt more putting more wear and tear on it shortening it’s lifespan! Also a slight deterioration in IQ is noticeable if you start cropping! Better wreaking a 300mm f/4 I think!
To be honest, if you’re thinking 300mm f/2.8 prime plus TC then you know that you want too head down the long focal length road therefore go straight for the 500mm Prime. If you’re thinking of versatility, then if I were you I’d really consider the 200-400mm f/4 (which I think you’ve got, in which case why the dilemma – no offence).
• 300mm f/2.8 VR is a great bird in flight lens, marco lens (coupled with an extension tube), big mammals.
• 300mm f/4 is a cheap but tack sharp lens offering the above (but no VR)
• 200-400mm f/4 VR superb all-rounder
• 500mm f/4 – good manageable Prime
• 600mm f/4 – My favourite in big glass
• 800mm f/5.6 – Mother of a lens (Good small birding lens)
• 300-800mm – Man wish I was fitter!!!
As for the bokeh, well that depends on your lens, but in my experience, that TC doesn't help you achieve smoother, cleaner BG’s. The 300mm f/2.8 is better than the 300mm f/4, but can anyone say it is really worth it, in terms of money, weight and so forth?
As they say the choice is yours – sorry I wasn’t much help!!!