Photography - equipment, help hints

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I have a Sigma 70-300 with a Macro feature, which I really enjoy. The most used lens I have at the moment, is my Sigma 50-200 and the least used, is my Sigma 300 Prime.

I have been eyeing the Sigma 50-500...

I do actually own a few Pentax lenses, but a casual observer might get the idea that I prefer Sigma glass :lol:
 
Heck, that's some zoom there Geo !
It must be a) darned big and heavy, and b) extremely expensive !!

David, it's the Sigma 70 - 300 mm + Macro that I have, which came as part of a 'bundle' with my Nikon. It's not at all a bad lens, and the Macro facility is very useful, but I found that it was a tad slow, in auto-focus, for most aviation work, especially fast-moving subjects at airshows, so I bought a Nikon 55-300 mm, which I now have mounted on a Nikon D-80 I picked up used, but in great condition, at a great price, and use the Nikon D-3100 with the 18-55 mm lens for general stuff, along with the excellent little Fuji S-1000 'bridge' camera.
I'd considered getting the Sigma 400 mm or 500 mm zoom, both of which are half the price of the Nikon 400 mm but, although it's reportedly an excellent lens, I'm still concerned about the focus speed.
 
Ah, it's a 'bridge' camera - I thought it was a new DSLR lens.
It's amazing what some 'bridge' cameras are capable of - my little 10 mp Fuji is now 8 years old, and slightly dated by today' standards, but the results are excellent, in virtually all shooting conditions. I'd go so far as to say that, in general 'happy snap' use, it's certainly as good as, and in some cases better than the Nikon D-3100 when the latter is used on full auto.
Although I have used it for ground to air photography, I have to admit that, although the results in many cases have been more than acceptable, it does, of course, have limitations, including speed of focus and zoom, and the small, electronic viewfinder, but other than that, it really is an amazing and wonderful piece of kit, and inexpensive considering it's capabilities.
 
Airframes said:
Interesting how, since the advent of the DSLR, 'prime' lenses, such as the 'standard' lens, 50 mm for example, are way more expensive than 'zoom' lenses. In the days of 35 mm SLR's, it used to be the other way around - a good 50 mm or 35 mm lens would be a reasonable price, although not cheap, where a half-decent 'zoom' lens would be much more expensive.
I'm still trying to decide whether to save up for the Nikon 400 mm zoom, or just stick with the Nikon 300 mm and the slower, but with a Macro facility, Sigma 300 mm.
Oh, decisions, decisions .................
Click to expand...
This 50mm lens is not expensive Terry, just 98 euro.

Btw it really is a great lens. The big aperture makes it very special. Consider a wall:
F/22:
kSOrolB.jpg


F/1.8:
INvpgf6.jpg
 
Thanks Marcel. At that sort of price, I might consider getting one just for model photography, when I take 'proper' shots of finished models, and it would also be useful for a variety of 'standard' shots, as I think it would have the edge over the Nikon 18 - 55 mm lens, even though the latter is a nice lens.
That said, I have a tendency to use the little Fuji 'bridge' camera just for 'everyday' shots, as it produces some great images, often better than the Nikon !
 
Airframes said:
Thanks Marcel. At that sort of price, I might consider getting one just for model photography, when I take 'proper' shots of finished models, and it would also be useful for a variety of 'standard' shots, as I think it would have the edge over the Nikon 18 - 55 mm lens, even though the latter is a nice lens.
That said, I have a tendency to use the little Fuji 'bridge' camera just for 'everyday' shots, as it produces some great images, often better than the Nikon !
Click to expand...
You'll not be disappointed byt the fixed 50 Terry. It's amazingly sharp, I never knew my 18-55 lens was unsharp until I put this thing on. But the fixed zoom is something to get used to, though. I'll put some photo's in my own thread.
 
I've had a look at the photos you posted Marcel, and they are sharp !
The advantage of a 'fixed' 50 mm lens for me would be the aperture range - as you said, the 18 - 55 mm lens is somewhat limited in this area, and the smaller aperture of the 50 mm, at f22, would allow much deeper DoF for model photography.
Is your camera/lens a Nikon ?
 
Thanks Marcel. And you're right, the piece of glass on the front is the most important thing.
I have an 'entry-level' Nikon D3100, bought new three years ago, so a bit dated even now, and a used, but like new, Nikon D-80, so again 'old' by the rapidly changing standards of today.
There's a heck of a difference between the two, the older D-80 being far superior to the D3100, but a decent lens on either would make a lot of difference.
 
Well while I share your horror I am completely relieved, that explains it. My initial thought was that the apocalypse was upon us as the moon was cracking in half
 

Attachments

  • Header10.jpg
    Header10.jpg
    32.2 KB · Views: 46
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Capt. J. Craig McClure
Help to ID German air units; late 43 early 44 15th USAAF area of operation
Replies
13
Views
974
Capt. J. Craig McClure
Capt. J. Craig McClure
Zipper730
Artistic Help
Replies
14
Views
992
Marcel
Marcel
TonyMarch
Help me ID this WW2 fighter
Replies
9
Views
2K
Tieleader
Tieleader
mishazeltser
Military Aviation From Israel By Michael Zeltser Aviation Photography
2 3
Replies
42
Views
6K
vikingBerserker
vikingBerserker
Aaron Brooks Wolters
Need help finding info.
Replies
0
Views
2K
Aaron Brooks Wolters
Aaron Brooks Wolters
Back