Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: sigma 50-500

  1. #21
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    509

    Default

    First thing to note - the Sigma 50-500's telephoto end is not really 500mm ... it's more like 465mm (a bit of creative fudging in Sigma's marketing department).

    Second thing - how come nobody has recommended a Kirk King Cobra or a Wimberley Sidekick to support this lens? For a long lens like this, a gimbal-type mount is the best. If you use a ballhead, the lens is effectively balanced on top of your ball. If you are not careful, your lens might flop when you release the head and cause the whole tripod to come crashing down. If you use a gimbal-type head, your lens is suspended from the arm. It is very stable and much easier to use.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    3,644

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amfibius
    First thing to note - the Sigma 50-500's telephoto end is not really 500mm ... it's more like 465mm (a bit of creative fudging in Sigma's marketing department).
    May I know where did u get the fact on the above comment? Am interested to know. thx

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amfibius
    First thing to note - the Sigma 50-500's telephoto end is not really 500mm ... it's more like 465mm (a bit of creative fudging in Sigma's marketing department).

    Second thing - how come nobody has recommended a Kirk King Cobra or a Wimberley Sidekick to support this lens? For a long lens like this, a gimbal-type mount is the best. If you use a ballhead, the lens is effectively balanced on top of your ball. If you are not careful, your lens might flop when you release the head and cause the whole tripod to come crashing down. If you use a gimbal-type head, your lens is suspended from the arm. It is very stable and much easier to use.

    actually yes i think it was written somewhere in dpreview.. somebody commented that it's not really 500mm.. but that isn't really a big matter... it's still very very long.

    as for using a gimbal head... yeah i've went to check out myself.. a sidekick can only be used with an arca ballhead... a wimberly original head costs $570 USD list price. that's like way out of my budget...

  4. #24
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    East/West
    Posts
    106

    Default

    can this be use for D70. wats the price like ?

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shineshy
    can this be use for D70. wats the price like ?
    I think Sigma has Nikon mount definitely but price should be on the big side... Sigh... how nice if the world would be nicer to our pockets....
    The equipment can only bring you so far - the rest of the photographic journey is done by you.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sequitur
    hmm.. yeah.. maybe i just get the 190.. but i don't like my centre column up and without the centre column up, the 190 is way too low. (though i'm not tall.. like 162... haha)

    hmm
    markins
    too ex lah !!!
    You really might wanna consider a heavier tripod eg 055 to support the 50-500mm as well as a good monopod in situations where you can't use a tripod. The bigger the lens, the more support you need. The 50-500 weighs 1.85 kg... together with a head and camera body, you might be hitting 2.5-3 kg or more.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by justarius
    You really might wanna consider a heavier tripod eg 055 to support the 50-500mm as well as a good monopod in situations where you can't use a tripod. The bigger the lens, the more support you need. The 50-500 weighs 1.85 kg... together with a head and camera body, you might be hitting 2.5-3 kg or more.

    yeah considering between the 055 and the 190.. but i read somewhere someone said that the ballhead is the more impt one than the tripod.. actually i think that's pretty true because part of the ballhead is responsible for not producing vibrations in the whole system..

    i already have a monopod.. yup.. thanks

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    1,226

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sequitur
    yeah considering between the 055 and the 190.. but i read somewhere someone said that the ballhead is the more impt one than the tripod.. actually i think that's pretty true because part of the ballhead is responsible for not producing vibrations in the whole system..

    i already have a monopod.. yup.. thanks
    hehe, your setup is only as strong as the weakest link. A ballhead capable of supporting 40kg isn't of much use if the corresponding tripod can only support 3 or 4 kg. In a long lens like the 50-500, any small vibration in the tripod (from wind, from passing lorries etc) would result in a big magnification of shake in the viewfinder....

  9. #29

    Default

    the weight of the 055 is godly... with a good ball head and u will be out for a good workout for the day's shooting

    unless u own a car, less weight to carry while travelling. otherwise, most of the time u will reach ur destination worn out and tired before the shoot

  10. #30
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tomshen
    ET: To reduce min working distance and get out-of-focus background. Actually somehow the image will become bigger at the same shooting distance with/without the ET.

    I applied some oild to make the collar not so tight.

    How did u break the switch?
    Not sure how it broke also, it just refused to budge one fine day. And the lens is out of warranty

  11. #31
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    West side of S'pore
    Posts
    5,528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cheesypoofs
    Not sure how it broke also, it just refused to budge one fine day. And the lens is out of warranty
    Repair shouldn't cost much rite? Maybe can call Sigma service center and ask them?

  12. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    West side of S'pore
    Posts
    5,528

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Amfibius
    First thing to note - the Sigma 50-500's telephoto end is not really 500mm ... it's more like 465mm (a bit of creative fudging in Sigma's marketing department).

    Second thing - how come nobody has recommended a Kirk King Cobra or a Wimberley Sidekick to support this lens? For a long lens like this, a gimbal-type mount is the best. If you use a ballhead, the lens is effectively balanced on top of your ball. If you are not careful, your lens might flop when you release the head and cause the whole tripod to come crashing down. If you use a gimbal-type head, your lens is suspended from the arm. It is very stable and much easier to use.
    I beg to differ. I dun think this lens warrant something like a Sidekick or Cobra. The makers of the Sidekick/Cobra recommend it for usage with a lens of at least the size and weight of a 300mm f2.8 or larger. The 50-500 is smaller and lighter than a 300mm f2.8. I think its overkill for such a lens.

    The higher end ballheads come with a tension adjustment thread, which allows you to adjust the minimum tension of the ballhead (with full load mounted) such that you can still rotate it easily but it will not be so loose as to flop over once u release your grip. Something which the cheaper ballheads cannot prevent.

    And yes the 50-500 is not really a true 500mm at its long end. (its a bit shorter than 500mm).

  13. #33

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MaGixShOe
    the weight of the 055 is godly... with a good ball head and u will be out for a good workout for the day's shooting

    unless u own a car, less weight to carry while travelling. otherwise, most of the time u will reach ur destination worn out and tired before the shoot
    Actually I found the newer version of 055 is not that heavy vs. my 190Pro B .. dunno what change, but it definitely lighter vs. the 055 that I tried before I purchase my 190 ...

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Singapore (SengKang)
    Posts
    2,789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bangkuangz
    Actually I found the newer version of 055 is not that heavy vs. my 190Pro B .. dunno what change, but it definitely lighter vs. the 055 that I tried before I purchase my 190 ...
    Really ? Where can I find the newer version.. is the manfrotto website updated with it ? Sorry to OT.. got excited.. hee..
    -Express yourself not in words-
    http://www.majere2sg.com

  15. #35

    Default

    garion

    i understand you're using the 50-500 also..

    can recommend a ballhead preferably under $300 ?

    or what do you recommend if there's no budget ?

  16. #36

    Default

    wahh.....50-500...tts a whole load of zoom...nikon hav??? i also want..

  17. #37

    Default

    i'm sorry to side-track.. but would appreciate if someone could tell me wat's the current price for getting the Sigma 50-500mm? 1st hand or 2nd hand doesn't matter...

    thanx.

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Singapore (SengKang)
    Posts
    2,789

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by destiny_star
    i'm sorry to side-track.. but would appreciate if someone could tell me wat's the current price for getting the Sigma 50-500mm? 1st hand or 2nd hand doesn't matter...

    thanx.
    A new one should cost around $1.6k.. I saw one at John 3:16 but don't know is for canon or nikon mount.
    -Express yourself not in words-
    http://www.majere2sg.com

  19. #39

    Default

    sigma prices have risen

    need at least $1700 to get one now.

    and hard to find
    usually in the $1800 range.

  20. #40
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,358

    Default

    just wondering... isn't it value for money considering the build quality and the optical quality of this lens? i think its really value for money considering it has that much zoom power in a single lens... Imagine buying the whole lot of primes in between...
    The equipment can only bring you so far - the rest of the photographic journey is done by you.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •