Thread: BIGMA anyone?

Epic shots.

Im surprised how they sharp they are for a superzoom.

Are those shot wide open? 500mm f6.3?

I also have that lens and use it mainly hand held.
Very happy with it. Good value I think.


.

Thank you for the report.
Do you have any samples @ 450-480mm focal lens and with bigger crop to see the bird details?
I guess that just under 500mm and with an aperture of about F/7 will be good.
The only problem is that will need very good light.
Just wonder how it will compare with the Nikon 300mm and the new TC 07 @ 450-480mm.
Cheers

@C0L0N3L: I've added a coupld more pics and exposure info to the original post. As you can see, they're all around f/8.0. I find that, even stopped down, at these long focal lengths the depth of field is unforgivingly shallow. Also note the 1/80s exposure on the last photo ... hand-held! Ok, wasn't the full 500, but still...

@Chucaro: Sorry, I don't have anything at the focal lengths you're looking for ... I suppose if you have 500mm available you're gonna use 500mm, not 450-480 In any case, you'd be comparing apples with oranges, FX/DX etc. I've done a few 100% crops of the original untouched NEFs to give you some idea. Also, with the light, except for the first and second-last, these were all taken in what I consider "poor" light.

Some good shots with the higher shutter speed.
Does it improve any at f/11?
Also I wonder how the BIGMA compares to the new Nikkor 28-300?

Am I correct in thinking you have a D700?

Originally Posted by slt

@Chucaro: Sorry, I don't have anything at the focal lengths you're looking for ... I suppose if you have 500mm available you're gonna use 500mm, not 450-480 .........

There is a reason why have asked you for images under 500mm
Zoom lens perform better just bellow the maximum focal lens and fully opened
As an example the Nikon 70-300 VR is rated as sharp as the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR both @ 200mm focal lens.

Thank you for the posts.

Originally Posted by Chucaro

There is a reason why have asked you for images under 500mm
Zoom lens perform better just bellow the maximum focal lens and fully opened
As an example the Nikon 70-300 VR is rated as sharp as the Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 VR both @ 200mm focal lens.

Thank you for the posts.

I think I know what you're saying, but 200mm is 66% of 300mm, whereas 450-480mm is 90-96% 500mm, and I doubt there'd be much difference. The lens is considerably sharper in the 50-300mm region compared to 500. Just look at the crop of the waterfall picture (@210mm).

Similarly, my Nikkor 24-70/2.8 is rather ordinary in the 24-36mm, but excellent above that, but again, we're talking 1/3 of the focal range here before there's a difference.

There's clearly a trade-off in the design of these "super-zooms", but one I can live with in this particular case. Sure, you can get a 300 f/4 + a TC1.7 for a similar amount of gold, but that's a one-trick pony. But if all you're ever gonna do is birds at 500-odd, then I'm sure that's the way to go on a budget.

Originally Posted by dmdigital

Does it improve any at f/11?

To be honest, I'm not sure. We're starting to talk tripod territory here on a lens like this, or shoot ISO1600 and above a lot. Not sure what long lenses people on here are working with, and I for one wouldn't mind seeing similar crops from those lenses. But in any case, I'm quite happy with what I see and have no hesitation to print any of the above (processed) photos at 16x24".

Originally Posted by dmdigital

Am I correct in thinking you have a D700?

You are.

I saw a guy in central Melbourne with one of these a couple of weeks ago. He looked somewhat conspicuous! You wouldn't want to seen near a beach with that lens.

But when you look at the measurements they are only a little larger than other large zooms.

Cheers, Steve