New lens advice anyone?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007.

  1. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF
    HSM. I read some reviews like this:

    http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx

    "Weaknesses:
    Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really heavy lens.
    Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when retracting-extending the
    zoom. Possible dust getting inside the lens, so don't use often it in dusty
    environments.
    Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS difficult to
    adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty and neat? or lighter?
    I prefer lighter.
    NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    No focus range selector.
    Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."

    Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or maybe a
    recommendation for a different selection. This will be the first quality
    lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right purchase. I have not
    seen it for much less than just under $900 so if anyone knows of a place
    where I might get one bargain price I would be happy to know where to shop.

    TIA.

    Jon.
    Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Jonathan

    Jim Guest

    "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF
    >HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >
    > http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >
    > "Weaknesses:
    > Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really heavy
    > lens.
    > Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when retracting-extending
    > the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the lens, so don't use often it in
    > dusty environments.
    > Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS difficult
    > to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty and neat? or
    > lighter? I prefer lighter.
    > NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    > No focus range selector.
    > Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >
    > Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or maybe a
    > recommendation for a different selection. This will be the first quality
    > lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right purchase. I have
    > not seen it for much less than just under $900 so if anyone knows of a
    > place where I might get one bargain price I would be happy to know where
    > to shop.
    >
    > TIA.
    >
    > Jon.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one that is
    put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.

    A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he told me.

    Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8 lenses.
    Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together. He finally had
    to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once again.

    Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.

    Jim
    Jim, Jun 29, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jonathan

    LuvLatins Guest

    On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:31:19 -0500, "Jim" <> wrote:

    >
    >"Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    >news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF
    >>HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>
    >> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>
    >> "Weaknesses:
    >> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really heavy
    >> lens.
    >> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when retracting-extending
    >> the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the lens, so don't use often it in
    >> dusty environments.
    >> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS difficult
    >> to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty and neat? or
    >> lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >> No focus range selector.
    >> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>
    >> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or maybe a
    >> recommendation for a different selection. This will be the first quality
    >> lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right purchase. I have
    >> not seen it for much less than just under $900 so if anyone knows of a
    >> place where I might get one bargain price I would be happy to know where
    >> to shop.
    >>
    >> TIA.
    >>
    >> Jon.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one that is
    >put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >
    >A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he told me.
    >
    >Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8 lenses.
    >Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together. He finally had
    >to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once again.
    >
    >Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >
    >Jim
    >


    If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
    angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go out
    of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
    http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159

    Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an amazing
    lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and the VR
    (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever seen) Im
    new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at like 1/30 or
    even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also agree what I have
    read about the Sigma is that they are not constructed very well.

    Good luck let us know what you finally buy and how it goes.

    LuvLatins
    LuvLatins, Jun 29, 2007
    #3
  4. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    Jim wrote:
    > "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    > news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >> I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
    >> APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>
    >> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>
    >> "Weaknesses:
    >> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really heavy
    >> lens.
    >> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
    >> retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
    >> lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
    >> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
    >> difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
    >> and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >> No focus range selector.
    >> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>
    >> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
    >> maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
    >> first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right
    >> purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under $900 so
    >> if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain price I
    >> would be happy to know where to shop.
    >>
    >> TIA.
    >>
    >> Jon.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>

    > Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    > that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >
    > A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    > especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he told
    > me.
    > Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8 lenses.
    > Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together. He
    > finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once again.
    >
    > Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >

    Thanks for the report. I saw it at a local Ritz and it is a bit heavy for me
    although it doesn't seem like I would need to pack any others except for a
    wide angle. This is going to be a tough decision.

    Jon
    Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007
    #4
  5. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    LuvLatins wrote:
    > On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:31:19 -0500, "Jim" <> wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    >> news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>> I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
    >>> APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>>
    >>> "Weaknesses:
    >>> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really
    >>> heavy lens.
    >>> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
    >>> retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
    >>> lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
    >>> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
    >>> difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
    >>> and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >>> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >>> No focus range selector.
    >>> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>>
    >>> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
    >>> maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
    >>> first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the
    >>> right purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under
    >>> $900 so if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain
    >>> price I would be happy to know where to shop.
    >>>
    >>> TIA.
    >>>
    >>> Jon.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>
    >> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
    >> told me.
    >>
    >> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
    >> He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
    >> again.
    >>
    >> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>
    >> Jim
    >>

    >
    > If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    > 18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    > google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
    > angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go out
    > of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
    > http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159
    >
    > Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an amazing
    > lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and the VR
    > (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever seen) Im
    > new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at like 1/30 or
    > even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also agree what I have
    > read about the Sigma is that they are not constructed very well.
    >
    > Good luck let us know what you finally buy and how it goes.
    >

    Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon is that
    much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am leaning towards Nikon
    if it is true about the Sigma not being built well. The reports of the dust
    getting inside and the screws loosening does not make me comfortable.

    Jon,
    Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007
    #5
  6. On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 20:32:52 -0400, "Jonathan" <>
    wrote:
    <snip>
    > Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or maybe a
    >recommendation for a different selection. This will be the first quality
    >lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right purchase. I have not
    >seen it for much less than just under $900 so if anyone knows of a place
    >where I might get one bargain price I would be happy to know where to shop.


    If your needs can be met with the 200-500 mm range, you might want to
    have a look at the Tamron 200-500 f/5-6.3. Available for less than
    900USD. I own one and am generally happy with the performance. Also, I
    remember seeing a lot of good reviews especially from some nature and
    wildlife photography sites.

    Have a great day,
    Pradeep
    --
    All opinions are mine and do not represent the views or
    policies of my employer.
    R Pradeep Chandran rpc AT pobox DOT com
    R Pradeep Chandran, Jun 29, 2007
    #6
  7. In article <>, R Pradeep
    Chandran <> wrote:

    > If your needs can be met with the 200-500 mm range, you might want to
    > have a look at the Tamron 200-500 f/5-6.3. Available for less than
    > 900USD. I own one and am generally happy with the performance. Also, I
    > remember seeing a lot of good reviews especially from some nature and
    > wildlife photography sites.


    I agree. Most of us who'd want 500mm also have shorter lenses, so who
    needs to start at 50? (with the expected optical compromises) My
    girlfriend has the Tamron 200-500, and I have the earlier 200-400. Both
    are very, very good. In fact, on a digital body I prefer the shorter,
    older lens as it's a lot lighter.
    Scott Schuckert, Jun 29, 2007
    #7
  8. Jonathan

    Jim Guest

    "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    news:m73hi.264$01.us.to.verio.net...
    > Jim wrote:
    >> "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    >> news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>> I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
    >>> APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>>
    >>> "Weaknesses:
    >>> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really heavy
    >>> lens.
    >>> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
    >>> retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
    >>> lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
    >>> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
    >>> difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
    >>> and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >>> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >>> No focus range selector.
    >>> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>>
    >>> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
    >>> maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
    >>> first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the right
    >>> purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under $900 so
    >>> if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain price I
    >>> would be happy to know where to shop.
    >>>
    >>> TIA.
    >>>
    >>> Jon.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>
    >> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he told
    >> me.
    >> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8 lenses.
    >> Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together. He
    >> finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once again.
    >>
    >> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>

    > Thanks for the report. I saw it at a local Ritz and it is a bit heavy for
    > me although it doesn't seem like I would need to pack any others except
    > for a wide angle. This is going to be a tough decision.
    >
    > Jon
    >

    You really need to put such a long lens on a tripod. The longest one that I
    own
    is a 300mm f4. Although I can and have taken quite a few shots hand held,
    it
    is much better on a tripod.
    Jim
    Jim, Jun 29, 2007
    #8
  9. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    Scott Schuckert wrote:
    > In article <>, R Pradeep
    > Chandran <> wrote:
    >
    >> If your needs can be met with the 200-500 mm range, you might want to
    >> have a look at the Tamron 200-500 f/5-6.3. Available for less than
    >> 900USD. I own one and am generally happy with the performance. Also,
    >> I remember seeing a lot of good reviews especially from some nature
    >> and wildlife photography sites.

    >
    > I agree. Most of us who'd want 500mm also have shorter lenses, so who
    > needs to start at 50? (with the expected optical compromises) My
    > girlfriend has the Tamron 200-500, and I have the earlier 200-400.
    > Both are very, very good. In fact, on a digital body I prefer the
    > shorter, older lens as it's a lot lighter.


    I thought about that but I the only lenses I have are AF Nikkor 50mm f1.8,
    AF Nikkor 50mm f1.4D and AF Nikkor 24mm f2.8. So this morning I bought the
    Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX APO RF HSM. I also bought a Multi Year ESP for
    $275.00 for 2 years. This was something that caught me off guard and I am
    still wondering if this was a good decision. I noticed a card in the box
    that mentions something about a 4 year service plan so I am not sure if I
    paid for something I didn't need. So far the lens seems nice but like the
    reviews it is rather tight. The manager at Ritz says it will loosen up and
    if not I can return it for an exchange or maybe she meant I have to have it
    sent back. I guess I better check back with her and find out more. I was
    hoping to get some comments and learn more from you guys. I am not
    experienced and need an education on buying and using these lenses. I am
    also wondering if it would be a bad idea to use a 2X converter if I want to
    go past 500mm. I have to learn what the EX and APO RF and HSM mean.

    Thanks to those that posted and I welcome any more comments good or bad.

    Jon
    Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007
    #9
  10. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    Jim wrote:
    > "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    > news:m73hi.264$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >> Jim wrote:
    >>> "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>>> I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
    >>>> APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>>>
    >>>> "Weaknesses:
    >>>> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really
    >>>> heavy lens.
    >>>> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
    >>>> retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
    >>>> lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
    >>>> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
    >>>> difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
    >>>> and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >>>> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >>>> No focus range selector.
    >>>> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>>>
    >>>> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
    >>>> maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
    >>>> first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the
    >>>> right purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under
    >>>> $900 so if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain
    >>>> price I would be happy to know where to shop.
    >>>>
    >>>> TIA.
    >>>>
    >>>> Jon.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >>> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>>
    >>> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >>> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
    >>> told me.
    >>> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >>> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
    >>> He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
    >>> again. Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>>

    >> Thanks for the report. I saw it at a local Ritz and it is a bit
    >> heavy for me although it doesn't seem like I would need to pack any
    >> others except for a wide angle. This is going to be a tough decision.
    >>
    >> Jon
    >>

    > You really need to put such a long lens on a tripod. The longest one
    > that I own
    > is a 300mm f4. Although I can and have taken quite a few shots hand
    > held, it
    > is much better on a tripod.
    > Jim


    I just bought a Manfrotto 785B that was less than I thought it would cost
    for a tripod but it seems to work ok. I might get a better one later as this
    one seems a bit small.

    Jon.
    Jonathan, Jun 29, 2007
    #10
  11. "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    news:Gc3hi.265$01.us.to.verio.net...
    > LuvLatins wrote:
    >> On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:31:19 -0500, "Jim" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>
    >>> "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:IqYgi.259$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>>> I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
    >>>> APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.photographyreview.com/cat/lenses/35mm-zoom/sigma/PRD_84817_3128crx.aspx
    >>>>
    >>>> "Weaknesses:
    >>>> Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really
    >>>> heavy lens.
    >>>> Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
    >>>> retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
    >>>> lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
    >>>> Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
    >>>> difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
    >>>> and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
    >>>> NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
    >>>> No focus range selector.
    >>>> Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."
    >>>>
    >>>> Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
    >>>> maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
    >>>> first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the
    >>>> right purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under
    >>>> $900 so if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain
    >>>> price I would be happy to know where to shop.
    >>>>
    >>>> TIA.
    >>>>
    >>>> Jon.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >>> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>>
    >>> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >>> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
    >>> told me.
    >>>
    >>> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >>> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
    >>> He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
    >>> again.
    >>>
    >>> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>>
    >>> Jim
    >>>

    >>
    >> If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    >> 18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    >> google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
    >> angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go out
    >> of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
    >> http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159
    >>
    >> Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an amazing
    >> lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and the VR
    >> (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever seen) Im
    >> new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at like 1/30 or
    >> even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also agree what I have
    >> read about the Sigma is that they are not constructed very well.
    >>
    >> Good luck let us know what you finally buy and how it goes.
    >>

    > Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon is
    > that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am leaning
    > towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built well. The
    > reports of the dust getting inside and the screws loosening does not make
    > me comfortable.
    >
    > Jon,


    I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no problems. I
    wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two reasons: one of my
    DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The other is my experience in
    owning them so I now buy them for my Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma,
    don't count out the 80-400mm EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX
    but it does have image stabilization.
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jun 30, 2007
    #11
  12. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest


    >>>> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >>>> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>>>
    >>>> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >>>> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
    >>>> told me.
    >>>>
    >>>> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >>>> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
    >>>> He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
    >>>> again.
    >>>>
    >>>> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>>>
    >>>> Jim
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    >>> 18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    >>> google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
    >>> angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go
    >>> out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
    >>> http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159
    >>>
    >>> Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
    >>> amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
    >>> the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
    >>> seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
    >>> like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
    >>> agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
    >>> constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy and
    >>> how it goes.
    >>>

    >> Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
    >> is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
    >> leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
    >> well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
    >> loosening does not make me comfortable.
    >>
    >> Jon,

    >
    > I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
    > problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
    > reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The
    > other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
    > Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
    > EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have image
    > stabilization.


    I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with them.
    The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right now. I am happy
    to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to compare it to. I have a
    Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one and most likely won't ever get
    used again. The only thing that I don't like is the tightness of this Sigma
    and it is beginning to worry me. I read about this and was told it would
    loosen up but I am now having my doubts. I was hoping to find someone that
    had one for a while and can give me an idea of what to expect. It wonder
    how much better a VR lens is and how well they actually work. Vibration
    reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image stabilization seems better.
    What was it like to use your first lens with Image Stabilization compared to
    one with out? Do you know if there is a difference from that and the VR?

    Thanks

    Jon.
    Jonathan, Jun 30, 2007
    #12
  13. "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    news:nVmhi.532$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >
    >>>>> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
    >>>>> that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
    >>>>> especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
    >>>>> told me.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >>>>> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
    >>>>> He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
    >>>>> again.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Jim
    >>>>>
    >>>>
    >>>> If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    >>>> 18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    >>>> google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
    >>>> angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go
    >>>> out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
    >>>> http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159
    >>>>
    >>>> Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
    >>>> amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
    >>>> the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
    >>>> seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
    >>>> like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
    >>>> agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
    >>>> constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy and
    >>>> how it goes.
    >>>>
    >>> Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
    >>> is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
    >>> leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
    >>> well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
    >>> loosening does not make me comfortable.
    >>>
    >>> Jon,

    >>
    >> I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
    >> problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
    >> reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The
    >> other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
    >> Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
    >> EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have image
    >> stabilization.

    >
    > I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with them.
    > The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right now. I am happy
    > to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to compare it to. I have a
    > Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one and most likely won't ever get
    > used again. The only thing that I don't like is the tightness of this
    > Sigma and it is beginning to worry me. I read about this and was told it
    > would loosen up but I am now having my doubts. I was hoping to find
    > someone that had one for a while and can give me an idea of what to
    > expect. It wonder how much better a VR lens is and how well they actually
    > work. Vibration reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image
    > stabilization seems better. What was it like to use your first lens with
    > Image Stabilization compared to one with out? Do you know if there is a
    > difference from that and the VR?
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > Jon.


    I do not own any image stabilized lenses. Image stabilization, optical
    stabilazation, vibration reduction - they're all different names for the
    same thing. I have used a friend's Sigma 80-400mm EX OS lens and it worked
    very well. It's a big and heavy lens compared to the popular Nikon 18-200
    VR lens. I've read many good reports about that lens, honestly I can't
    remember ever reading a comment in the Nikon forum at dpreview that was not
    good. Same for the Nikon 70-300mm VR and the newer and inexpensive 55-200mm
    VR. If the range of the 70-300mm VR is good for you, consider that one.
    Sigma also has a new 18-200mm OS lens that is available any day (according
    to Sigma) for Canon mount and then will be followed up with Nikon and Sigma
    mounts.
    Peter A. Stavrakoglou, Jun 30, 2007
    #13
  14. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
    > "Jonathan" <> wrote in message
    > news:nVmhi.532$01.us.to.verio.net...
    >>
    >>>>>> Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get
    >>>>>> one that is put together correctly, then you have a very good
    >>>>>> lens. A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is
    >>>>>> not especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is
    >>>>>> what he told me.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
    >>>>>> lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it
    >>>>>> together. He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws
    >>>>>> tight once again.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Jim
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
    >>>>> 18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
    >>>>> google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto,
    >>>>> wide angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one
    >>>>> they go out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got
    >>>>> in a few.
    >>>>> http://www.adorama.com/Search-Results.tpl?page=searchresults&searchinfo=2159
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
    >>>>> amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
    >>>>> the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
    >>>>> seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
    >>>>> like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
    >>>>> agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
    >>>>> constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy
    >>>>> and how it goes.
    >>>>>
    >>>> Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
    >>>> is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
    >>>> leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
    >>>> well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
    >>>> loosening does not make me comfortable.
    >>>>
    >>>> Jon,
    >>>
    >>> I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
    >>> problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
    >>> reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying.
    >>> The other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
    >>> Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
    >>> EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have
    >>> image stabilization.

    >>
    >> I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with
    >> them. The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right
    >> now. I am happy to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to
    >> compare it to. I have a Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one
    >> and most likely won't ever get used again. The only thing that I
    >> don't like is the tightness of this Sigma and it is beginning to
    >> worry me. I read about this and was told it would loosen up but I am
    >> now having my doubts. I was hoping to find someone that had one for
    >> a while and can give me an idea of what to expect. It wonder how
    >> much better a VR lens is and how well they actually work. Vibration
    >> reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image stabilization seems
    >> better. What was it like to use your first lens with Image
    >> Stabilization compared to one with out? Do you know if there is a
    >> difference from that and the VR? Thanks
    >>
    >> Jon.

    >
    > I do not own any image stabilized lenses. Image stabilization,
    > optical stabilazation, vibration reduction - they're all different
    > names for the same thing. I have used a friend's Sigma 80-400mm EX
    > OS lens and it worked very well. It's a big and heavy lens compared
    > to the popular Nikon 18-200 VR lens. I've read many good reports
    > about that lens, honestly I can't remember ever reading a comment in
    > the Nikon forum at dpreview that was not good. Same for the Nikon
    > 70-300mm VR and the newer and inexpensive 55-200mm VR. If the range
    > of the 70-300mm VR is good for you, consider that one. Sigma also has
    > a new 18-200mm OS lens that is available any day (according to Sigma)
    > for Canon mount and then will be followed up with Nikon and Sigma
    > mounts.



    My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on a
    tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are made by
    Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was told it was the
    same glass and nothing was the bit least different. Why would Ritz sell both
    names if that is the case? A manager of one Ritz store told me the
    tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work itself out while a manager of
    another store said it would not. Who can you trust anyway? I try to read
    reviews but all the ones I see are written by new owners.

    Jon
    Jonathan, Jun 30, 2007
    #14
  15. Jonathan wrote:
    []
    > My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on
    > a tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are
    > made by Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was
    > told it was the same glass and nothing was the bit least different.
    > Why would Ritz sell both names if that is the case? A manager of one
    > Ritz store told me the tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work
    > itself out while a manager of another store said it would not. Who
    > can you trust anyway? I try to read reviews but all the ones I see
    > are written by new owners.
    > Jon


    I would imagine that the store managers are interested, primarily, in
    maximising profit.

    I was delighted recently, though, when recently a store salesman (in
    Jesspos, UK) was honest enough to tell me "we would make more profit by
    selling you X, but for your needs Y is adequate and will save you $200".

    David
    David J Taylor, Jul 1, 2007
    #15
  16. Jonathan

    Jonathan Guest

    David J Taylor wrote:
    > Jonathan wrote:
    > []
    >> My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on
    >> a tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are
    >> made by Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was
    >> told it was the same glass and nothing was the bit least different.
    >> Why would Ritz sell both names if that is the case? A manager of one
    >> Ritz store told me the tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work
    >> itself out while a manager of another store said it would not. Who
    >> can you trust anyway? I try to read reviews but all the ones I see
    >> are written by new owners.
    >> Jon

    >
    > I would imagine that the store managers are interested, primarily, in
    > maximising profit.
    >
    > I was delighted recently, though, when recently a store salesman (in
    > Jesspos, UK) was honest enough to tell me "we would make more profit
    > by selling you X, but for your needs Y is adequate and will save you
    > $200".


    I don't mind what they say that much as long as they know the profession. I
    often wonder how much of it is BS. I would think that the first "manager"
    might say the tightness would work out to make a sale but in another Ritz
    the guy said that would not happen so he was more honest and he probably
    knew what he was talking about.
    Jonathan, Jul 1, 2007
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Amyotte
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    696
    amyotte
    Feb 11, 2004
  2. Pete D

    New lens anyone?

    Pete D, Nov 3, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    483
    Ray Fischer
    Nov 3, 2005
  3. slartibartfast

    New to DSLR - Lens advice?

    slartibartfast, Nov 18, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    356
    Siddhartha Jain
    Nov 19, 2005
  4. Devon

    Quick lens hood advice anyone?

    Devon, Aug 26, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    16
    Views:
    527
    Chris Malcolm
    Aug 27, 2007
  5. Lee
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    862
Loading...

Share This Page