sigma 500 f4.5 ex hsm if dg

[drumbatter100]

Sigma 500 f4.5 ex hsm if dg

Does anybody on this site have experience with this lens. I currently use a sigma 120-300 f2.8 for most of my photography but at times I feel very much undergunned. If you have this lens or any experience of this lens I would be interested to hear your views on it.

[Steven Gourlay]

Don't have any experience of that lens, but jumping from a 300-500 is somthing i was going to do fairly recently. I have a Canon 100-400mm USM L and found a 2nd hand Canon 500mm, the issues i had were:

1) New tripod head required
2) Not as flexible as having a zoom
3) Weight and size of the lens not as compact to carry
3) Wife would kill me

Overall i decided to after some posts on this forum to forget the idea for now. The more focal length you can get the better, spending several K on a lens you have to make the right choice or it could be a costly mistake. Have you thought about hiring one for the weekend?

[John Fairclough]

Hello.

Before I go into my thoughts, comments and advice, can you please explain to me what you mean by "I feel very much undergunned", please ignore my ignorance.
When i uderstand this I will then perhaps be in a better position to comment on your question and advise you.

Keep on clickin.

John f

[Steven Gourlay]

I personally took that as not enough focal length but i could be wrong.

[John Fairclough]

If you are correct Steve and the focal length is insufficient, I think Drumbatter has only three further options.
1) A 1.4 extender.
2) To invest in an 800mm F5.6 lens.
3) Toimprove on his field craft techniques. This would most certainly be the cheaper.
Keep on clickin.
John F

[drumbatter100]

Thanks john and steve for your comments. Steve is correct in saying that my lens dosent have enough magnification. I have tried tc's but the pictures turn out far too soft. I think John is probably right in saying that I need 800mm, not quite sure what john means by improving field craft, as most of my bird shots are taken on minimum focusing of 8-10 feet,. It would be nice to have a working distance of 20ft "it would make all the difference.

[John Fairclough]

Hi.
Can I please ask you a couple of questions about the problem you are describing.
1) Whats is the lens, camera, and convertors you are using?
2) Have they ever been, if so when, where they service as one piece?
3) What is the distance between you and you subject birds?
4) What type of birds are they?
Look forward to hearing from you.
Keep on clickin.
John F

[drumbatter100]

Hi John,

The camera is a canon 40d, The lens is a sigma 120-300 f2.8, I have tried this combination with Both sigma 1.4 and 2x tc's, Canon 1.4tc and Kenko pro 300 (I think was a 1.5) which I had borrowed. I had the lens serviced and calibrated to my camera body last February but not with tc's. Ive tried them on grebes, kingfishers, finches etc and I generally get as close as possible. The kingfisher pictures on pages 1 and2 of my gallery are taken with naked lens from a distance of 8-10 feet and I feel are pretty sharp. Similar pictures taken with 1.4 tc over 15-20 feet were really soft. I hope this answers your questions.

regards Alan

[John Fairclough]

Hi Alan.
Sorry I have not been back to you sooner, but I have been working, yes even on a Sunday - dreaded office work.
At the risk of offending you, which is the last I would want to do, I am going to mention a few of the obvious first.
1) Check the support system is very rugged and sturdy - no body/lens movement.
2) Check the very small screws have not come loose in the burnet system which connects/locks the camera to the lens. (This has happened to me)

The way in which I am reading your info says you are only having the "soft" problem when working towards or at the minimum focal length/focusing distance of the lens. This being the case I would run some tests with your camera and an object being static (perhaps in the garden) and gradually move the object towards your camera one step at a time, moving the object only small distances.
Set your camera up exactly as you have it in the field.
The problem may be that your lens is out of calibration at the min end.
Look forward to hearing how you go on.
Keep on clickin.
John F

[Greywolf]

Once you get into the realm of super long lenses (300+mm) you really have to consider ALL of the following:

1 serious support I use a Manfrotto 055 Xpro with a Manfrotto 393 long lens support
2 cable release
3 mirror lock up
4 higher ISO

without some or preferably all of these you risk compromising sharpness with the result of disappointing images.

Personally for this long focal length stuff I simply wouldn't bother with a zoom. Primes are lighter, generally faster in terms of AF and give better IQ and IQ is what you need.

As you are a Canon user have you thought of the 400 f5.6 Sometimes know as the forgotten 400. It is razor sharp, light wieght, excellent for flight shots and will take a 1.4 extender with little loss of IQ. True it doesn't have IS but then it is very affordable.

The only other lens that I would consider, and one day I hope to have one when I retire, I have a print of it on my wall, is the 500mm f4.

You could think about the 800mm but you will need to enrol with a gym. It is a monster.