GimliGlider From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 90 posts, RR: 0 Posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 12347 times:
I shoot with a Nikon D80. I'm looking at upgrading my zoom from a Nikon 80-400 to a Sigma 150-500 for a number of reasons.
1) Autofocus
The AF on the lens can be very slow, not very good, for example, for shooting at the local AFB or for the jet acts at airshows.
2) Softness/General Image Quality
Can be very soft at times, especially with lower apertures. Colors aren't always that great.
3) Focal Length
I'm looking for just a little bit more reach.
Would the Sigma fix any of these problems? How is the build quality and overall image quality through the zoom spectrum? Is there another lens that I should be looking at for these results (at a similar price and reach)?
Thanks!
"You could attach that to your house and still go 0-60 in 5 seconds..."
Sluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2 Reply 4, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 12189 times:
Quoting GimliGlider (Thread starter): I shoot with a Nikon D80. I'm looking at upgrading my zoom from a Nikon 80-400 to a Sigma 150-500 for a number of reasons.
Quoting GimliGlider (Thread starter): The AF on the lens can be very slow, not very good, for example, for shooting at the local AFB or for the jet acts at airshows.
Ever think about a long prime? The Nikon 300 F4 AF-S (I replaced my 80-400 with this lens) is tack sharp and the AF is rather quick, even when coupled with a kenko 1.4x teleconverter. Its one hell of a performer at airshows as well, again even with the tc, I've yet to leave without a smile on my face, and at 1100 dollars its quite a bargain.
Joey
I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
I certainly have. The question on that front's always been flexibility versus quality. Over time, I've been starting to lean less towards flexibility. I'll see if any local camera stores have the 300 for rent though just to try it. Thanks for the advice!
"You could attach that to your house and still go 0-60 in 5 seconds..."
Sluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 12101 times:
Quoting GimliGlider (Reply 5): The question on that front's always been flexibility versus quality.
Oh trust me I was stuck at that cross road myself. In the end I went with it because, sure I'd be loosing the ability in most cases to shoot a side on, but the quality of my 3/4 shots, which I love, would sky rocket, and again don't forget about the airshows. If you're a big airshow shooter, no zoom can match the quality and speed of a prime.
Sluger020889 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (4 years 4 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 12044 times:
Quoting GimliGlider (Reply 7): What's the sweet-spot aperture wise for the 300?
There lies another huge advantage in the 300 F4, the sweet spot, at least in my experience is in the f5.6 to f6.3 range. I hardly ever go up to f7.1 or f8, there's no need.
I looked back through my originals from Oceana, the only set i have on my computer at the moment, and sampled a few shots with aircraft on blue sky and they are as follows...
Nikon D200
420mm (300 + 1.4x)
ISO200 (I sometimes use 200 to get a little extra kick in the shutter,)
shutter speeds ranging from 1/750th, 1/1000, 1/1250
-0.3EV exposure comp
Even when using lower ISO's the shutter speed is still at or above 1/500th at f5.6 or f6.3.
Joey Collura
I would love to fly a cargo plane full of rubber dog shit out of Hong Kong!
Sponsor Message: 
From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 90 posts, 
From Ireland, joined May 2005, 3106 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 456 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
