hope you are all well. I was just hoping to get some advice on two lenses please.
Bearing in mind I'm not a great fan of zooms, I have conceded that due to the budget I need to look at get a good zoom.
I am looking at both the Nikon 80-400mm VR and the Sigma's 'Bigma' 50-500mm. I am very tempted to let the extra 100mm go to have the VR. I would have considered the sigma's 150-500mm OS but the results and reviews are fairly average.
Any advice on either of the lenses would be greatly received.
Drew
Posted by John Robinson on October 31, 2008 at 11:20 AM
Hi Drew
I've had both the Nikon and the Bigma. I kept the latter and sold the first to Kieth Mitchell.
I never could ge ton with it, but others say its OK
The bigma is great when you get it right, but I certainly wouldn't go for the 150-500.
Cheers
John
Posted by David Sewell on October 31, 2008 at 1:13 PM
Hi Drew,
I would go along with John on this one. The Bigma is a great lens, and I would not be without it now. However, it weighs a ton (at least, it feels like a ton after an hour or two in the field), and I find I need either a tripod or a very firm surface to lean it on. I have just bought myself a Nikon 70-300 VR to go with it, so that I have something lightweight I can carry around on days when a tripod is not practical. It has only done a single outing so far, but I am pleased with early results.
I suspect a 80-400 VR is something of a compromise between the two, and only you can judge whether it suits the way you take pictures.
Posted by Steve Makin on October 31, 2008 at 3:00 PM
I have a VR 80-400 and sometimes its super sharp and sometimes its extremely disapointing and I cant for the life of me fathom it out, in good light and stopped down to f8 its superb, everything else is in the lap of the gods, the VR function makes me feel sick and again I've never fully got to grips with this either
I was out for a walk this afternoon and I use this lens with a D300, the first shots are fine but as soon as the light faded (down to say 250 at f6.3 at 1200asa) I put it away.
The Sigma 150-500 OS would seem to be a perfect combination but I've yet to read any report that says its worth the money, look up Andy Astbury's review on here for probably the most balanced review to date, I'll be keeping the VR 80-400 for now as I'm familiar with its .
I have an 80-400 and like Steve I have a love hate relationship with it. Sometimes its super sharp even @ 400mm wide open and the next time under the same conditions it proves to be very disapointing . I had and later sold the Bigma 50-500 and have regretted it more than once. It was sharp and contrasty even wide open f6.3 @ 500mm and even took a Sigma 1.4TC and still worked well. It did however require a sturdy tripod or monopod to get the best results.
I did think about getting the 150-500 with OS but the reviews seem to be a very mixed bag.
Given a second chance I would sell the 80-400 and keep the Bigma as it always gave very good results.
Discussion
4 replieshope you are all well. I was just hoping to get some advice on two lenses please.
Bearing in mind I'm not a great fan of zooms, I have conceded that due to the budget I need to look at get a good zoom.
I am looking at both the Nikon 80-400mm VR and the Sigma's 'Bigma' 50-500mm. I am very tempted to let the extra 100mm go to have the VR. I would have considered the sigma's 150-500mm OS but the results and reviews are fairly average.
Any advice on either of the lenses would be greatly received.
Drew
I've had both the Nikon and the Bigma. I kept the latter and sold the first to Kieth Mitchell.
I never could ge ton with it, but others say its OK
The bigma is great when you get it right, but I certainly wouldn't go for the 150-500.
Cheers
John
I would go along with John on this one. The Bigma is a great lens, and I would not be without it now. However, it weighs a ton (at least, it feels like a ton after an hour or two in the field), and I find I need either a tripod or a very firm surface to lean it on. I have just bought myself a Nikon 70-300 VR to go with it, so that I have something lightweight I can carry around on days when a tripod is not practical. It has only done a single outing so far, but I am pleased with early results.
I suspect a 80-400 VR is something of a compromise between the two, and only you can judge whether it suits the way you take pictures.
I was out for a walk this afternoon and I use this lens with a D300, the first shots are fine but as soon as the light faded (down to say 250 at f6.3 at 1200asa) I put it away.
The Sigma 150-500 OS would seem to be a perfect combination but I've yet to read any report that says its worth the money, look up Andy Astbury's review on here for probably the most balanced review to date, I'll be keeping the VR 80-400 for now as I'm familiar with its .
I have an 80-400 and like Steve I have a love hate relationship with it. Sometimes its super sharp even @ 400mm wide open and the next time under the same conditions it proves to be very disapointing
I did think about getting the 150-500 with OS but the reviews seem to be a very mixed bag.
Given a second chance I would sell the 80-400 and keep the Bigma as it always gave very good results.
Regards
Ian