Of swallows, ducks and pigeons
- Thread starter Zerstorer
- Start date
- Status
The cheapest entry lens would be a 2nd hand Sigma 400 f5.6 prime.
It can cost between $300+ to $600+ 2nd hand depending on the exact version. APO, APO Macro, APO Macro HSM...etc.
Not sure of the quality, but it shouldn't be any worse than my 2XTC combo.
It can cost between $300+ to $600+ 2nd hand depending on the exact version. APO, APO Macro, APO Macro HSM...etc.
Not sure of the quality, but it shouldn't be any worse than my 2XTC combo.
Age and features? Those with APO(apochromatic design) only are the older lenses. The newer ones had macro capability and the even newer ones have HSM(USM/AFS) motors added. The latest version seems to be better optically as well according to some comments online.
Yes this is the same lens. Most people refer to it as Sigma 50-500 for short.Wolfgang said:
About $1,600 new. Around $1,200 for a 2nd hand one.Wolfgang said:How much would it cost btw?
Hey wolfie,
Hehe.. getting bored with human portraiture? ;p
Here's my take... no doubt the 50-500 is a good lens with good reach and that is not costing a bomb. But one thing you must be aware of, is its weight. It weighs about 1.6kg and mere mortals like me quickly find it hard to hold it after awhile.
I would recommend a 300f/4L with a 1.4TC. This would give you 420 5.6, and the weight is much more bearable. It gives you flexibility too, as you can take advantage of f4 if your subject for the day does not require you that long a reach.
EF300 F/4L goes for about 1k -1.2k used. If you are willing to spend more, get the IS version (about 1.6-1.8k used). Which IMHO is much better as it focuses closer (1.5m vs 2.5m) and you can handhold it with the aid of IS.
Hope this was helpful
Oops, apologies to the thread starter for OTing... :embrass:
Hehe.. getting bored with human portraiture? ;p
Here's my take... no doubt the 50-500 is a good lens with good reach and that is not costing a bomb. But one thing you must be aware of, is its weight. It weighs about 1.6kg and mere mortals like me quickly find it hard to hold it after awhile.
I would recommend a 300f/4L with a 1.4TC. This would give you 420 5.6, and the weight is much more bearable. It gives you flexibility too, as you can take advantage of f4 if your subject for the day does not require you that long a reach.
EF300 F/4L goes for about 1k -1.2k used. If you are willing to spend more, get the IS version (about 1.6-1.8k used). Which IMHO is much better as it focuses closer (1.5m vs 2.5m) and you can handhold it with the aid of IS.
Hope this was helpful
Oops, apologies to the thread starter for OTing... :embrass:
Got....all of us heard it when we were in MOG last sunday.Garion said:Wolfie, get the Sigma 50-500 lar. About $1,600 new, perhaps $1,200 2nd hand. Good value for money.
Huh? I got say meh? :think: More like "tan ku ku".... :bsmilie:
More like Mai Tu Liao !
Zerstorer,
Not bad for initial attempts!
Try to shoot with the sun behind you without using flash. Their eyes will look more natural and have beautiful catchlight.
Cheers.
Not bad for initial attempts!
Try to shoot with the sun behind you without using flash. Their eyes will look more natural and have beautiful catchlight.
Cheers.
Zerstorer said:Just dabbling in something that I've not tried before.
Been drooling at some of your shots recently.:thumbsup:
I am sure you will love it, the feeling of being in nature is really good, the shots are just secondary. That said, I am sure you will excel here given your know-how in photography. Keep shooting pal
Wolfgang said:Ouch... :bheart:
Regular birdshooetrs, any recommandations?
Wolfy, based on my limited experience, I will say buy what you can afford first and progress in the better lenses when you are comfortable enough (ie. mentally and financially).
Most birds in Singapore are rather skittish in nature, and though owning a lens of great focal length+speed is helpful, it is the technique, skill and dedication of each individual that really counts. There are occasions when large, fixed focal lenses are crippled and the shorter, more versatile lenses having a field day.
Given your camera system, I think the better choice for you would be the 300/4 (IS or not doesn't matter) coupled with your system's 1.4x and 2x TC. This will give you a native focal length of 420mm at f5.6 and 600mm at f8, not too shabby to start off given enough lighting.
Don't forget about investing in a proper support for your setup too, it is one important aspect in this field of photography given the great focal lengths involved. It is not easy to get pin sharp results when your support is inadequate.
Hope this is helpful and feel free to fire away if in doubt.
Avatar said:Wolfy, based on my limited experience, I will say buy what you can afford first and progress in the better lenses when you are comfortable enough (ie. mentally and financially).
Most birds in Singapore are rather skittish in nature, and though owning a lens of great focal length+speed is helpful, it is the technique, skill and dedication of each individual that really counts. There are occasions when large, fixed focal lenses are crippled and the shorter, more versatile lenses having a field day.
Given your camera system, I think the better choice for you would be the 300/4 (IS or not doesn't matter) coupled with your system's 1.4x and 2x TC. This will give you a native focal length of 420mm at f5.6 and 600mm at f8, not too shabby to start off given enough lighting.
Don't forget about investing in a proper support for your setup too, it is one important aspect in this field of photography given the great focal lengths involved. It is not easy to get pin sharp results when your support is inadequate.
Hope this is helpful and feel free to fire away if in doubt.
Since you did ask me to fire away... :devil: Avatar; for your recommandation, "Given your camera system, I think the better choice for you would be the 300/4 (IS or not doesn't matter) coupled with your system's 1.4x and 2x TC. This will give you a native focal length of 420mm at f5.6 and 600mm at f8, not too shabby to start off given enough lighting."
How much would it cost? Possible to give me a break down?
At the same time, vs the 50-500 Sigma, which would be a better choice?
Kindly advise.
- Status
Similar threads
