Sigma 50-500 zoom lens

Bugger, I’m Nikon

Dammien what mount, how much ?

Umm, I once had a Tamron ‘adaptall’ lens, 28-70 I think, and it was great. But this was in the days of Canon FD mounts and non-auto anything and my expectations were probably lower.
I tried a big Tamron a couple of years back and sure it was cheap – it looked cheap, felt cheap and performance was, well lets say not fantastic. However I was using a Nikon 400 f4 and a Nikon 300 f2.8 at the time so my expectations were pretty high.
If I was doing this for my crust there is no doubt that I would use nothing but Nikon prime lenses, but I’m not and I cant. Therefore I have to make compromises and having owned several Sigma lenes to date I believe that they offer excellent image quality at at reasonable price.
It would be interesting to see what percentage of folks buy top brand bodies and then go for alternative lens manufacturers, I would hazzard at about 75%.
Perhaps Nikon, Canon, Minolta there is some lesson to be learnt here. I work in an industry where we have the best product on the market (MRI) and our customers demand a year on year 5% price reduction, so effectively our products are half the price they were 10 years ago. Being the best does not mean you have to be the most expensive.

How about a Tamron 200 – 400? Very light, and cheap (- ish).

Then stumbled into some interesting comments about birdphotography:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~eijsel/fototips.htm

best regards atc pal

Thanks Philo,

That price of £649. for the Sigma 50-500 is by far the cheapest I’ve seen, Jessops want over £600 for a second hand one.

And thanks everybody for the input on this, I would dearly love a Nikon version but there is no way I can justify that sort of cash for just airshow use.

Yep , thats what I thought.
Do Nikon seriously want people to buy this ?
I have just been searching around a bit for this new Sigma 80-400 OS and it would appear that hardly any dealers have it yet althought some are taking orders. I have just called Bristol Cameras who are generally the cheapest and they are aware of its existence but have no availablity dates or pricing as yet.
I have seen it advertised at £899, I’m sure that this will be beaten. I have not seen any reports yet, but if its favourable I will be intersted in getting one.

Of course there is always this one:-
Latest News
Nikon announces new Super Telephoto Zoom Nikkor with Vibration Reduction and Silent Wave Motor
The first 2x super telephoto Nikkor lens to be fitted with both Vibration Reduction (VR) and Silent Wave Motor (SWM) is announced today. The AF-S VR Zoom-Nikkor 200-400mm f/4G IF-ED features a super telephoto zoom reach with the advantages of Vibration Reduction for increased photographic opportunities in low light.

<<…OLE_Obj…>>
The Vibration Reduction system offers up to three stops slower shutter speeds either in Normal Mode for hand held shooting or Active Mode when shooting from a moving platform. The VR system can also detect panning movement.

The optical design includes 24 glass elements in 17 groups manufactured to the latest environmental standards. Four ED glass elements ensure sharp, high contrast results with film or digital. The picture angle is equivalent to 135 format focal lengths of 300mm to 600mm when used with a Nikon DX format Digital SLR, fast and quiet auto focus enabled by the incorporation of a Silent Wave Motor (SWM).

The f/4 maximum aperture and overall length remain constant at all focal lengths and focus distances, and a new ‘Memory Set’ button close to the camera body, facilitates instant one touch focus re-set.

Environmental protection has been attended to with rubber seals around the F mount bayonet and drop-in filter slot, and damage prevention has been improved thanks to a removable clear glass front element.

Compatible with both TC-14E II and TC-20E II teleconverters.
Weighing in at just 3200g, the lens is about 300g lighter than the AF-S Nikkor 500mm f/4D IF-ED II.
The lens comes complete with hood (HK-30), shoulder strap (LN-1) and soft case (CL-L2).
Expected availability October 2003, estimated price £5,499
Posted on: Tuesday 22 July 2003

Septic,

I use the 170-500 on my Canon 10D and have been generally pleased with the results. It is heavy, and can be a little bit slow, but I can’t compare with the 50-500. You’d be able to compare weight on (I think) Warehouse Express’s site.

I’ve posted a few shots on the thread “More Fairford photos”. These were all taken using that lens, and sharpened /cropped in PhotoElements. The F-16 is amazingly sharp when I printed it. I do find that a bit of clarity is lost when posting – I have no idea why!

CargoM

http://www.warehouseexpress.co.uk/ list the sigma 80-400 OS as ‘arriving July’ and give a price of £899.99

hth

Gareth

Some interesting comments there chaps, I am about to purchase a new lens and have looked at the 50-500, 170-500 and the Nikon 80-400 VR (there is also a Sigma 135-400 which I know nothing about, no reports that I can find).
I have discounted the 80-400vr, primarily on price, but also have a couple of friends using them and whilst they are happy with the performance they are not ecstatic.
I have read several reports on the 170-500 and I don’t think it cuts the mustard.
The 500-500 seems to come out top in my analysis, based on speaking with users, reading reports (one photo mag said ‘it was the best super zoom that they had ever tested’) and of course cost.
There is a photo dealer in Bristol offering the 50-500 for £649.00, thats a very good price.
However all this said, if Sigma are going to be releasing a VR version I might just wait, any ideas when and how much ?

Tell me about it, I’m still trying to convince my wife that it will be cheaper in the long run.

Been there, done it still buying T shirts!!

thats the only problems with D-SLRs, the cost of buying the camera is only the start of it!!:D

(microdrives, photoshop, faster PC, extra lenses….. never ends!)

Thanks Gareth,

Great photos, this has confirmed the earlier posts. I will now go and empty my piggy bank,which is only just recovering from the D100 purchase!

Been using the 50-500 with my D100 for about 6 months now Septic, done four shows (Coventry, Kemble, Waddington and Legends) with it and am very pleased with it.

Being able to pull back to 50mm (75mm equivalent on the D100) to get a tristar in one minute, then zoom in to 500mm (750mm equivalent) on the next fighter makes it invaluable when it gets busy. For what it does (10x zoom range) it has no competition (for Nikon owners at least), and the price is unbeatable. Nikon does produce a 100-400VR zoom but since it has no AF-S it is slow to focus, not good for aircraft.

The 50-500 does need careful handling however, I generally handhold it but have used a monopod at arrivals days, that improves my success rate at the 500mm end, and relieves the strain on the back, neck and shoulder, it IS a Heavy beast! I prefer to keep it stopped down a couple of stops whenever possible, even if this means pushing the ISO to 400, 500, it certainly improves its sharpness. The 80-400 sounds interesting especially with its optical stabilisation, but I’ve yet to see an independent review of it published so far.

Couple of examples taken with my 50-500

Thanks chaps for the advice, I had not even considered the weight penalty of this lens, I will add some ballast to my sigma 400mm telephoto to gauge the weight issue. I just wish Nikon made such an affordable and versatile lens

I am planning to replace my 170-500mm to a 50-500mm for my D-100, it was fine when I was film but have noticed it’s shortcomings now I’ve gone digital only having a 225mm(1.5x increase) bottom end of the zoom has cause a few swear words at times this year. But I was told about the new sigma 80-400 OS the other day, same idea as the canon’s IS I believe has any one tried or seen one of these yet?

Hmm. Cheers for that Damien.

I did fine with it on the D30, at 500, and have had stuff published from it at the long end too – perhaps I got lucky? Thats with EOS 5’s, and either Velvia or E100VS. have only just got it back from Sigma, so haven’t used it on the 10D yet (no time). Perhaps I may wander down the beach on Thursday or Friday in my break. (I have MANY breaks on airshow days!).

Eh? Superior to the 170-500? How so?

Thats got my ears pricked up! Just interested as I have the 170-500 (rechipped at last!) that I got in ’96, it’s a 500 5.6 in canon (6.3 in other fittings).

The only time I tried the 50-500 I found it extremely heavy, cumbersome, difficult to handhold, and i lost the lenshood (it was a borrowed lens too). I found my 170-500 images that I usually took to be sharper. Now, optically speaking, a test bench may show the 50-500 to be the superior lens, but with the better hand-holdability, in practice (for me) the 170-500 produced better results. Of course, the 50-500 hadn’t come out when I bought mine, but I think I would still have chosen the same out of the two now due to size, weight and compactness. I would reccomend it, but am now unsure!!! Perhaps it’s time I tried one again. Put me out of my misery old boy!