New lens advice anyone?

"Jonathan" wrote in message
rio.net...
LuvLatins wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jun 2007 22:31:19 -0500, "Jim" wrote:


"Jonathan" wrote in message
rio.net...
I have a D100 and am thinking of getting a Sigma 50-500mm f4-6.3 EX
APO RF HSM. I read some reviews like this:

http://www.photographyreview.com/cat...7_3128crx.aspx

"Weaknesses:
Weight. Although is good for a lens of 500mm, is STILL a really
heavy lens.
Moving barrel, works as a vacuum dust cleaner when
retracting-extending the zoom. Possible dust getting inside the
lens, so don't use often it in dusty environments.
Paint gets off the magnesium tripod collar, but paint is ALWAYS
difficult to adhere in this kind of substance; just choose, pretty
and neat? or lighter? I prefer lighter.
NO Image stabilization. Sigma... get on it quick please.
No focus range selector.
Lens cap difficult to place without removing the hood."

Does anyone agree with this assessment and have anything to add or
maybe a recommendation for a different selection. This will be the
first quality lens and at $1000 I want to make sure I make the
right purchase. I have not seen it for much less than just under
$900 so if anyone knows of a place where I might get one bargain
price I would be happy to know where to shop.

TIA.

Jon.








Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.

A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
told me.

Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
again.

Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.

Jim


If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go out
of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
http://www.adorama.com/Search-Result...earchinfo=2159

Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an amazing
lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and the VR
(vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever seen) Im
new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at like 1/30 or
even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also agree what I have
read about the Sigma is that they are not constructed very well.

Good luck let us know what you finally buy and how it goes.

Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon is
that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am leaning
towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built well. The
reports of the dust getting inside and the screws loosening does not make
me comfortable.

Jon,

I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no problems. I
wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two reasons: one of my
DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The other is my experience in
owning them so I now buy them for my Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma,
don't count out the 80-400mm EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX
but it does have image stabilization.

Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.

A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
told me.

Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
again.

Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.

Jim


If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go
out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
http://www.adorama.com/Search-Result...earchinfo=2159

Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy and
how it goes.

Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
loosening does not make me comfortable.

Jon,

I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The
other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have image
stabilization.

I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with them.
The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right now. I am happy
to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to compare it to. I have a
Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one and most likely won't ever get
used again. The only thing that I don't like is the tightness of this Sigma
and it is beginning to worry me. I read about this and was told it would
loosen up but I am now having my doubts. I was hoping to find someone that
had one for a while and can give me an idea of what to expect. It wonder
how much better a VR lens is and how well they actually work. Vibration
reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image stabilization seems better.
What was it like to use your first lens with Image Stabilization compared to
one with out? Do you know if there is a difference from that and the VR?

Thanks

Jon.

"Jonathan" wrote in message
rio.net...

Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get one
that is put together correctly, then you have a very good lens.

A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is not
especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is what he
told me.

Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it together.
He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws tight once
again.

Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.

Jim


If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto, wide
angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one they go
out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got in a few.
http://www.adorama.com/Search-Result...earchinfo=2159

Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy and
how it goes.

Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
loosening does not make me comfortable.

Jon,

I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying. The
other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have image
stabilization.

I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with them.
The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right now. I am happy
to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to compare it to. I have a
Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one and most likely won't ever get
used again. The only thing that I don't like is the tightness of this
Sigma and it is beginning to worry me. I read about this and was told it
would loosen up but I am now having my doubts. I was hoping to find
someone that had one for a while and can give me an idea of what to
expect. It wonder how much better a VR lens is and how well they actually
work. Vibration reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image
stabilization seems better. What was it like to use your first lens with
Image Stabilization compared to one with out? Do you know if there is a
difference from that and the VR?

Thanks

Jon.

I do not own any image stabilized lenses. Image stabilization, optical
stabilazation, vibration reduction - they're all different names for the
same thing. I have used a friend's Sigma 80-400mm EX OS lens and it worked
very well. It's a big and heavy lens compared to the popular Nikon 18-200
VR lens. I've read many good reports about that lens, honestly I can't
remember ever reading a comment in the Nikon forum at dpreview that was not
good. Same for the Nikon 70-300mm VR and the newer and inexpensive 55-200mm
VR. If the range of the 70-300mm VR is good for you, consider that one.
Sigma also has a new 18-200mm OS lens that is available any day (according
to Sigma) for Canon mount and then will be followed up with Nikon and Sigma
mounts.

Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
"Jonathan" wrote in message
rio.net...

Sigma is not famous for build quality. In general, if you get
one that is put together correctly, then you have a very good
lens. A friend of mine owns one of these lenses. He said that it is
not especially sharp at the 500 focal length. All I know is
what he told me.

Another friend of mine owned one of the early Sigma 300mm f2.8
lenses. Evidently they use a lot of set screws to hold it
together. He finally had to send it to Sigma to get these screws
tight once again.

Other friends own well built Sigmas, and they like them a lot.

Jim


If your willing to spend $900 then I would suggest buying a Nikon
18-200 (2159) I just got mine and its an amazing lens. Fantastic
google it and check the reviews. I love it. Macro, Telephoto,
wide angle all in one lense. But be careful, hard to find one
they go out of stock as fast as they come in but adorama just got
in a few.
http://www.adorama.com/Search-Result...earchinfo=2159

Now that I posted this kiss them goodbye. LOL, serious its an
amazing lens. A bit soft at 18 and 200 but amazing pictures and
the VR (vibration reduction is the most amazing thing I have ever
seen) Im new also but the VR lets you take a telephoto picture at
like 1/30 or even 1/15 and still no blur in the picture. I also
agree what I have read about the Sigma is that they are not
constructed very well. Good luck let us know what you finally buy
and how it goes.

Thanks for the tip. I did like the idea of a 500mm but if the Nikon
is that much better maybe I will find 200mm will do fine. I am
leaning towards Nikon if it is true about the Sigma not being built
well. The reports of the dust getting inside and the screws
loosening does not make me comfortable.

Jon,

I've got five Sigma EX lenses, all are very well-built with no
problems. I wouldn't hesitate at all to buy a Sigma lens for two
reasons: one of my DSLRs is a Sigma so that goes without saying.
The other is my experience in owning them so I now buy them for my
Nikon. If you are considering a Sigma, don't count out the 80-400mm
EX OS. It has less range than the 50-500mm EX but it does have
image stabilization.

I am glad to learn you have so many Sigma lenses and are happy with
them. The price of Nikkors are a bit more than I can spend right
now. I am happy to have such a nice lens but I have nothing to
compare it to. I have a Nikkor 70-300 4-5.6 G but it's a cheap one
and most likely won't ever get used again. The only thing that I
don't like is the tightness of this Sigma and it is beginning to
worry me. I read about this and was told it would loosen up but I am
now having my doubts. I was hoping to find someone that had one for
a while and can give me an idea of what to expect. It wonder how
much better a VR lens is and how well they actually work. Vibration
reduction doesn't seem like a good term. Image stabilization seems
better. What was it like to use your first lens with Image
Stabilization compared to one with out? Do you know if there is a
difference from that and the VR? Thanks

Jon.

I do not own any image stabilized lenses. Image stabilization,
optical stabilazation, vibration reduction - they're all different
names for the same thing. I have used a friend's Sigma 80-400mm EX
OS lens and it worked very well. It's a big and heavy lens compared
to the popular Nikon 18-200 VR lens. I've read many good reports
about that lens, honestly I can't remember ever reading a comment in
the Nikon forum at dpreview that was not good. Same for the Nikon
70-300mm VR and the newer and inexpensive 55-200mm VR. If the range
of the 70-300mm VR is good for you, consider that one. Sigma also has
a new 18-200mm OS lens that is available any day (according to Sigma)
for Canon mount and then will be followed up with Nikon and Sigma
mounts.


My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on a
tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are made by
Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was told it was the
same glass and nothing was the bit least different. Why would Ritz sell both
names if that is the case? A manager of one Ritz store told me the
tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work itself out while a manager of
another store said it would not. Who can you trust anyway? I try to read
reviews but all the ones I see are written by new owners.

Jon

Jonathan wrote:
[]
My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on
a tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are
made by Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was
told it was the same glass and nothing was the bit least different.
Why would Ritz sell both names if that is the case? A manager of one
Ritz store told me the tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work
itself out while a manager of another store said it would not. Who
can you trust anyway? I try to read reviews but all the ones I see
are written by new owners.
Jon

I would imagine that the store managers are interested, primarily, in
maximising profit.

I was delighted recently, though, when recently a store salesman (in
Jesspos, UK) was honest enough to tell me "we would make more profit by
selling you X, but for your needs Y is adequate and will save you $200".

David

David J Taylor wrote:
Jonathan wrote:
[]
My question is why would you need a VR/IS lens if you will have it on
a tripod anyway? Ritz sells Quantaray that according to them are
made by Sigma and identical. Does that make sense to anyone? I was
told it was the same glass and nothing was the bit least different.
Why would Ritz sell both names if that is the case? A manager of one
Ritz store told me the tightness of the Sigma 50-500mm would work
itself out while a manager of another store said it would not. Who
can you trust anyway? I try to read reviews but all the ones I see
are written by new owners.
Jon

I would imagine that the store managers are interested, primarily, in
maximising profit.

I was delighted recently, though, when recently a store salesman (in
Jesspos, UK) was honest enough to tell me "we would make more profit
by selling you X, but for your needs Y is adequate and will save you
$200".

I don't mind what they say that much as long as they know the profession. I
often wonder how much of it is BS. I would think that the first "manager"
might say the tightness would work out to make a sale but in another Ritz
the guy said that would not happen so he was more honest and he probably
knew what he was talking about.