Pics of Sigma's new OS telephoto zooms!!


Status
Not open for further replies.

sriram

New Member
Mar 10, 2002
1,253
0
0
#2
The 80-400 looks just like Nikon's 80-400VR, though the focusing ought to be faster. The one time I tried a 80-400VR it took 15 minutes to focus from close-up to infinity. This will give Nikon users a great low cost (and faster focusing) alternative.
 

Kei

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 17, 2002
2,080
0
36
#4
Originally posted by sriram
The one time I tried a 80-400VR it took 15 minutes to focus from close-up to infinity.
:eek: :eek: :eek:
 

mylau

New Member
Jan 19, 2002
1,019
0
0
33
#6
Originally posted by sriram
The 80-400 looks just like Nikon's 80-400VR, though the focusing ought to be faster. The one time I tried a 80-400VR it took 15 minutes to focus from close-up to infinity. This will give Nikon users a great low cost (and faster focusing) alternative.
15 MINUTES!!! Enough time for coffee!
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#7
Oh lovely, lovely people, they've finally done it. A 120-300/2.8 zoom. Maybe needed to be a bit wider, but finally. Pity that [1] I might not need it [2] digital sensors are going full frame. Ah well.
 

sriram

New Member
Mar 10, 2002
1,253
0
0
#8
Have they mentioned the weight of these lenses? I can't imagine the weight of a 120-300 f/2.8 and the other monster. A fixed 300/2.8 is enough pain for the shoulders to carry around.
 

Red Dawn

Senior Member
Jan 17, 2002
2,464
1
38
Singapore
www.5stonesphoto.com
#9
Hi

oh my goodness so the rumours are true after all??!
i was worried for a while i might be spreading false rumours in my earlier news postings........

the 300-800 constant f5.6 looks quite an achievement ;)
 

Jed

Senior Member
Jan 19, 2002
3,911
0
0
UK
Visit site
#12
I haven't scrutinised the piccies, but one possibility is that the lenses aren't drawn to scale and the 300-800 just looks like it has a small tripod collar because of its overall size.

A 300/2.8 heavy to carry around? Nice one. I'm really really not fussed because of this stupid full frame thing now, looks like being back to 400s. Now those are heavy.
 

tomshen

Senior Member
Feb 20, 2002
3,644
0
36
Singapore
#13
Technically, with a full frame 10+ MP digital image, an out-of-camera cropping can get one a 4MP+ image without loss of quality if printed small, but I doubt whether many pple will do so since it brings a feeling as not original:dunno:
 

sriram

New Member
Mar 10, 2002
1,253
0
0
#14
Originally posted by Jed
A 300/2.8 heavy to carry around? Nice one.
Well maybe you are a muscleman? Me, I'm down to a Canonet QL17 rangefinder. Now that's nice.
 

#15
Originally posted by Jed
I haven't scrutinised the piccies, but one possibility is that the lenses aren't drawn to scale and the 300-800 just looks like it has a small tripod collar because of its overall size.

A 300/2.8 heavy to carry around? Nice one. I'm really really not fussed because of this stupid full frame thing now, looks like being back to 400s. Now those are heavy.
You can continue using 1.5 flm cameras. :) Or get the Sickma SD-9 with an even higher FLM....

Regards
CK
 

mylau

New Member
Jan 19, 2002
1,019
0
0
33
#17
Originally posted by willyfoo
How much do you think the 300-800 will cost??
Let me make the first guess. How about $10,000?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom