User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  1
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: sigma 50-500 0r 150-500 to suit 7d?

  1. #1
    Member kipp's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Aug 2010
    Location
    Rosebud
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    sigma 50-500 0r 150-500 to suit 7d?

    hi i am looking at getting a long zoom lens for mostly wildlife shots, and these two seem both good. what im wondering is if it is worth spending the extra $600 to get the wider angle 50-500 or is this a waste of money? it is probably not something that will be left on the camera due to the weight and size, and my 15-85 is left on when hiking etc? most likley to be used around camp and the car.
    thanks kipp
    i will be away next week so apologies if im slow to reply

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    26 Jul 2010
    Location
    South
    Posts
    254
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd delete your post if I were you, I nearly got banned for this. Just a haeds up, we are not allowed to sell on-forum (via private message or public)
    Canon stuff 5Dmk1 w/ 24-70 f2.8L, Canon 5Dmk1 w/70-200f2.8L, 100mm f2.8 macro, 50mm f1.4, 580exII
    Alienbees B800, Lumopro 160, Manfrotto 155XPROB w/ 498RC2, Lowepro ProRunner X450AW
    Phew!

  3. #3
    Member Tonym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Aug 2010
    Location
    Lower Hunter Valley
    Posts
    86
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I must have missed something here? I am wondering along the same lines also but I think I would use the 50 end of the 50-500 a fair bit and I would also get the stabilised lens. If you are not wanting a stabilised one then there are some 50-500s around second hand.

  4. #4
    Account Closed reaction's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2008
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    792
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd say get 150-500
    generally the longer range, the poorer IQ.
    you dn't need 50 for wildlife
    may even be worth getting a 600 prime or sth similar?

  5. #5
    Member
    Threadstarter
    kipp's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Aug 2010
    Location
    Rosebud
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ZedEx View Post
    I'd delete your post if I were you, I nearly got banned for this. Just a haeds up, we are not allowed to sell on-forum (via private message or public)
    sorry i think you misunderstood me i'm asking which one to buy not to sell

  6. #6
    It's all about the Light!
    Tech Admin
    Kym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Jun 2008
    Location
    Modbury, Adelaide
    Posts
    9,641
    Mentioned
    18 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by kipp View Post
    sorry i think you misunderstood me i'm asking which one to buy not to sell
    Not your post, another one now deleted

  7. #7
    Member
    Threadstarter
    kipp's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Aug 2010
    Location
    Rosebud
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    yeah i will be looking at an OS lens, and i wonder how useful the extra range will be and if it will still take a good photo at the shorter focal length?

  8. #8
    Still in the Circle of Confusion Cage's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 May 2010
    Location
    Hunter Valley
    Posts
    5,350
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I'd recommend the 150-500 for wildlife. Longer is better.

    The gap between your 15-85 and the 150-500 could be filled with a macro such as the Sigma 105, which also doubles as a handy short telephoto.

    Cheers

    Kevin
    Cheers
    Kev

    D600 : D7200 and too much stuff to list

  9. #9
    Member Tonym's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Aug 2010
    Location
    Lower Hunter Valley
    Posts
    86
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I just say the 50-500 because one day I had been out shooting some birds with my 120-400 on my old 350D and I walked inside the house and saw my dog doing something I wanted to photo so I could show the missus when she got home and when I got the camera out in a hurry and pointed for the shot the dog was to close for the 120 end of the lens. So I just think if I had a 50 it would have been ok for the distance, I subsequently missed the shot. I know IQ suffers with the high magnification but I am prepared to put up with that for the sake of a more useable (for me) lens

Posting Permissions

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