Sigma 70-210mm f/4-5.6 UC II

Hello.

I'm about to buy Sigma 70-210mm f/4-5.6 UC II AF for Minolta. What do
you think about this lens? Is it sharpen and quick enough?

Or, maybe, I can buy something better in $140 with 200-300 mm? - I plan
to use this lens for outdoor photography: some animals, birds, remote
scenes...

Thanks for advices,
V.

If you are taking photographs of birds then it is highly suggested to
obtain a larger focal length.

I originally started out with the lens you were looking at ... then
added a teleconverter ... but the image quality was poor and
magnification was not sufficient that the photographs were becoming a
waste of time.
I looked into a 75-300mm zoom but it also suffered (to a lesser degree)
from the same problems.

I currently use a 400mm f4.5 lens for all my wildlife shots (my wife
uses a 400mm f5.6 lens).
In the long run the cost of the lens has been paid off in the number of
quality images I now have.


Vov@ Sadovyy wrote:
Hello.

I'm about to buy Sigma 70-210mm f/4-5.6 UC II AF for Minolta. What do
you think about this lens? Is it sharpen and quick enough?

Or, maybe, I can buy something better in $140 with 200-300 mm? - I plan
to use this lens for outdoor photography: some animals, birds, remote
scenes...

Thanks for advices,
V.

Mister K wrote:
Vov@ Sadovyy wrote:

Hello.

I'm about to buy Sigma 70-210mm f/4-5.6 UC II AF for Minolta. What do
you think about this lens? Is it sharpen and quick enough?

If you are taking photographs of birds then it is highly suggested to
obtain a larger focal length.

I currently use a 400mm f4.5 lens for all my wildlife shots (my wife
uses a 400mm f5.6 lens).
In the long run the cost of the lens has been paid off in the number of
quality images I now have.

Hmmm. I find 400 isn't quite enough for frame filling photos. At that
focal length wild birds are either looking very suspicious or leaving
in a hurry.

Adding a 2x TC helps but on my camera that means manual focus and the
equivalent of an F11 lens at 800mm. :-(

Are there any solutions (that cost less than a small car) ?

"Rob Davison" Mister K wrote:
Vov@ Sadovyy wrote:

Hello.

I'm about to buy Sigma 70-210mm f/4-5.6 UC II AF for Minolta. What do
you think about this lens? Is it sharpen and quick enough?

Don't waste your money. Buy a MF 200m f4 Rokkor, used. Or, buy the longest
Rokkor lens you can afford (again: used, MF). No AF system will
track a bird in flight - don't bother trying.

Hmmm. I find 400 isn't quite enough for frame filling photos. At that
focal length wild birds are either looking very suspicious or leaving
in a hurry.

Are there any solutions (that cost less than a small car) ?

1) A bird blind. Any old tent will do. A partially open window
in your house with the lens sticking through and the curtains
drawn around the lens works fine.

2) Bird seed or animal feed hidden out of view of the
camera. A seed & suet ball from the grocery store pet
counter hung on a branch serves as a great attractant
-- photograph the bird as it sits to the side of the
feed.

Cost: Bird blind -- Zilch. Bird seed -- A dollar or two.

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.

From: "Nicholas O. Lindan"

No AF system will track a bird in flight - don't bother trying.

I can track larger birds like eagles, cranes, herons and (sometimes) snow geese
in flight with my Canon EOS-3, and the 1V is even better. This is with a 500
f/4 L lens, often with a 1.4x tele-converter.

Lots of people do this ...

"Bill Hilton" wrote

"Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:

No AF system will track a bird in flight - don't bother trying.

I can track larger birds like eagles, cranes, herons and (sometimes) snow geese
in flight with my Canon EOS-3, and the 1V is even better. This is with a 500
f/4 L lens, often with a 1.4x tele-converter.

Lots of people do this ...

I stand corrected. Going by my own experience here in Ohio -- not
much in the way of eagles, I have only seen one stork (and I am sure
it was lost), no herons (well, some egrets here and there), zilch in
the way of peacocks, cranes, flamingos .... Lots of Canadian geese,
but who wants a pic of a Canadian goose, 'cepting for varmint rifle
practice. Now and then a red tail hawk, but way up high.

Now, cardinals, blue jays, gross beaks, sparrows et. al. when in
flight are another matter when it comes to AF.

Ohio: The home of manual focus, the Amish and the world's largest
buggy whip manufacturer (our only growth industry, it seems).

--
Nicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio
Consulting Engineer: Electronics; Informatics; Photonics.

Don't waste your money. Buy a MF 200m f4 Rokkor, used. Or, buy the longest
Rokkor lens you can afford (again: used, MF). No AF system will
track a bird in flight - don't bother trying.

I have Maxxum Minolta, so I need the lens for this camera.. I saw this
lens used for $75 - is it a high price?

Are there any solutions (that cost less than a small car) ?


1) A bird blind. Any old tent will do. A partially open window
in your house with the lens sticking through and the curtains
drawn around the lens works fine.

2) Bird seed or animal feed hidden out of view of the
camera. A seed & suet ball from the grocery store pet
counter hung on a branch serves as a great attractant
-- photograph the bird as it sits to the side of the
feed.

I think, it is right approach..

200 mm - from which distance is possible to create suitable shot of
small bird, like a sparrow, with this focus length?

There is a neat calculator at the bottom of the this website page
http://www.photo.net/making-photographs/focal-length
You will find you have to be very close to a small bird to get a
"frame-filling" image with a 200mm lens, even with the 1.6 magnification
factor of the 10D.
Norm

Sorry. I think this url will work better.
http://www.photo.net/making-photographs/lens

Try again http://www.photo.net/making-photographs/lens