Sponsor Message:
Aviation Photography Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Super-Tele For A Dusty Environment :-s  
User currently offlinevishaljo From India, joined Aug 2006, 474 posts, RR: 4
Posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3835 times:

People calling the 100-400 as dust-pump    scares me as there's plenty of dust everywhere here in BOM.

Would a conventional twist-zoom be better than a push-pull due to the reason mentioned above or am i just overcautious ?

Here are the 2 lenses i'm looking at Sigma 50-500 OS vs Canon 100-400 IS

I've used the 100-400 a few times & while the push-pull takes a little getting used to, its not at all a problem for me.

The quality is nice indeed, not as good as some of the f2.8 glass i've used but fine nevertheless.

I've never used a Sigma before.
Their legendary reputation when it comes to getting the right lens first-up is also a bit troubling as i would be ordering it with a friend or relative of mine from the US.

Next concern with the Sigma is the AF & the short shelf-life Matte Finish which would make me look like a photographer from Iraq or Afghanistan within a few months if i bought it that is.

Only reason of me considering the 50-500 OS is because of its beginning focal length of 50mm which is ideal for my primary spotting location (which right now is a No-Go Zone to put it mildly) but besides, 50mm is just a handy length to start with !

I would value your opinions on this subject   

[Edited 2010-04-22 08:13:02]

[Edited 2010-04-22 08:17:45]

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2934 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3805 times:

Given the large extension of the 50-500, it's as much as a 'dust pump' as the 100-400. I've been using the 50-500 for 5 years how and had it cleaned internally when it went back to Sigma for a focussing problem after 2.5 years. It has some dust inside again, but it's not really a problem. What concerns you about the AF? It's as quick as anything I've used and pretty accurate.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinep2philip From Austria, joined Jan 2005, 99 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3741 times:

Hello,

I owned the 50-500 and I was able to get some good photos with it. However, it lacks AF speed, sharpness at 500mm and vignetting was quite obvious. I used the non-OS version.

I never regret the decision to switch to Canons 100-400, quality is overall better. The only thing I sometimes miss is the possibility to use 50mm. Also I do not have problems with dust at least not more than with other lenses.

@Darren: the 100-400 is often refered to as 'dust pump' because of the push-and-pull mechanism is said to suck dust into it, not because if the extension.

-Philip


User currently offlineTupolevTu154 From Germany, joined Aug 2004, 2186 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3728 times:

I don't know about anybody else but twisting the Sigma 50-500 is practically impossible if you want to go from 50-500 in one movement. I have the 80-400 and don't bother using the zoom ring, I just push and pull the lens hood and it does the job so much easier than rotating it. The amount of air that i can feel being expelled out of it when zooming out quickly is probably more than the 100-400!

The AF on my 80-400 is also extremely frustrating at times and needless to say I have lost many decent photographs because of it's irritating habit of focus hunting at extremely inappropriate moments.

I wish Canon still made the 35-350mm L , now THAT would be the perfect all rounder!



Atheists - Winning since 33 A.D.
User currently offlinevishaljo From India, joined Aug 2006, 474 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3680 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 1):
What concerns you about the AF?

This

Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 3):
irritating habit of focus hunting at extremely inappropriate moments.

And

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 1):
It's as quick as anything I've used and pretty accurate.

  

Quoting p2philip (Reply 2):
However, it lacks AF speed


  

Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 3):
The amount of air that i can feel being expelled out of it when zooming out quickly is probably more than the 100-400!

Thankfully you reside in the UK.

Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 3):
I wish Canon still made the 35-350mm L , now THAT would be the perfect all rounder!

I agree with you Tom.
I have a fine wide-to-midrange lens in the EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM,
therefore my dream lens is the Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 EX DG APO HSM

[Edited 2010-04-22 13:25:48]

User currently offlineTupolevTu154 From Germany, joined Aug 2004, 2186 posts, RR: 28
Reply 5, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3674 times:

Consistency is clearly Sigma's strong point  


Atheists - Winning since 33 A.D.
User currently offlinemho From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3612 times:

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 1):
it went back to Sigma for a focussing problem after 2.5 years.

Interesting - Did yours make a grinding noise and refuse to autofucus? I have a Sigma 70-300 with that problem, and it's just over 1 year old.

How was Sigma about repairing it - costly or reasonable?

Thanks.



It's better to be a little behind than a big ass
User currently offlineDvincent From United States of America, joined Jan 2007, 1753 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3605 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The focus speed on the 50-500 is serviceable. It's not blazing fast, but most of the time it'll get the job done.

Where it falls down is if it has to rack from infinity to minimum. A focus limiter would help this lens out a lot, and it is a feature you get on the Canon 100-400.



From the Mind of Minolta
User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4881 posts, RR: 37
Reply 8, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 3566 times:

Quoting p2philip (Reply 2):
I owned the 50-500 and I was able to get some good photos with it. However, it lacks AF speed,

Lacks AF speed? Mine was very fast. Mine was the non OS version as well (the classic Bigma). I didn't notice any dust problems with it.

But Vignetting was a huge problem at 400mm or above, and the image quality overall was pretty soft. Sigma repairs (mine was done in Japan) are quite good, the result coming back looked and otherwise worked like a brand new lens (hence why I got 80% of the value back after nearly 2 years of moderate use).

[Edited 2010-04-22 15:39:57]

User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2934 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3465 times:

Quoting p2philip (Reply 2):
@Darren: the 100-400 is often refered to as 'dust pump' because of the push-and-pull mechanism is said to suck dust into it, not because if the extension.

What I meant was the amount of air the lens displaces when you zoom in and out is pretty much equivelent as the push pull mechanism of the 100-400. In that way, in my experience, they are both on par with each other. When you zoom with the 50-500, it draws air in, it's not sealed. I used my 50-500 in Kenya last year that's a very dusty environment when you've pointing it toward a herd of elephants and driving through the wilderness. I had no problems when taking a common sense approach.

Quoting p2philip (Reply 2):
However, it lacks AF speed, sharpness at 500mm and vignetting was quite obvious. I used the non-OS version.

That is not my expeirience with the 50-500. Of course it's not the sharpest of lenses at 500mm, it's a super-zoom with a 10x ratio so you can't expect it to be. However between 50 and 400mm, it's pretty good and still very usable at 500mm (I've plenty of examples on the database). I can't say I've noticed too much vignetting, certainly not enough to cause problems. If all you want is a good (not exceptional) versitile lens, you can't go wrong with the 50-500. For me, the 100-400 is too long at the short end.

Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 3):
I wish Canon still made the 35-350mm L , now THAT would be the perfect all rounder!

I'd have one tomorrow! I tried to get one second hand before getting the 50-500, but they were like rocking horse droppings at the time.

Quoting mho (Reply 6):
Interesting - Did yours make a grinding noise and refuse to autofucus? I have a Sigma 70-300 with that problem, and it's just over 1 year old.

How was Sigma about repairing it - costly or reasonable?

No, it didn't make a grinding noise at all. It was a problem of not focussing between 200-300mm. Longer and shorter than that, it was fine. Sigma said it was a problem with the auto focus motor and said it needed replacing. It was about £70 all together, including the cleaning. A few months later, it did it again so I sent it back and they diagnosed the same problem, with the same quote. I pointed out it had already had that repair carried out so they did it under warrantee the second time. It still does it every now and then, but only in colder weather. It's fine when the lens is warm and in summer  


vishaljo (Reply 4):
This
Quoting TupolevTu154 (Reply 3):
I have lost many decent photographs because of it's irritating habit of focus hunting at extremely inappropriate moments

I can't say I've ever had that problem on the 50-500. I'ts not perfect by any means, but I can't remember the last time it hunted, other than when I was using it in the dark or when the contrast was so low, I bet any lens would have struggled.

Darren



Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinep2philip From Austria, joined Jan 2005, 99 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 23 hours ago) and read 3419 times:

Right, maybe I put that the wrong way. It lacks AF speed compared to all Canon lenses I used. Overall AF speed was OK, but nothing special at all.

User currently offlinedazbo5 From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2005, 2934 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 3400 times:

Quoting p2philip (Reply 10):
Right, maybe I put that the wrong way. It lacks AF speed compared to all Canon lenses I used. Overall AF speed was OK, but nothing special at all.

In my experience, it's much faster than the lower end Canon lenses, eg 75-300 IS USM, and on par with some of the higher end USM Canon lenses. I would say the 24-105 L is marginally quicker, but it's certainly no slouch and perfectly adequate for use with aviation photography.

Both these were taken at 500mm for example:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson



And these panning at relatively close distance (they are moving pretty fast!) and the AF copes just fine:


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Darren Wilson



It's ultimately personal preferenance and comes down to your budget, the focal lengths required and your overall needs.

Darren

[Edited 2010-04-23 07:52:17]


Equipment: 2x Canon EOS 50D; Sigma 10-20 EX DC HSM, 50-500 EX APO DG, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Speedlite 430EX
User currently offlinep2philip From Austria, joined Jan 2005, 99 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (4 years 8 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 3380 times:

Darren, yeah you are right of course it is adequate for aviation photography, I never put that in doubt. Still, I was not that impressed. I could also plug some of my shots taken with it at 500mm but the majority of shots taken at this focal lenght were clearly not A.net quality. So if I had to decide between Canons 100-400 and the Bigma, the choice would be an easy one. The other two examples of yours are not really hard to shoot, these could have been taken with many other cheaper lenses as well. We also seem to have different definitions of 'panning'. The Piper photo above is more of a panning shot than the two airliners below in my opinion...

User currently offlinevishaljo From India, joined Aug 2006, 474 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (4 years 8 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3259 times:

Quoting cpd (Reply 8):
But Vignetting was a huge problem at 400mm or above

Chris couldn't that be because you're a Full-Framer ?

Quoting dazbo5 (Reply 9):
For me, the 100-400 is too long at the short end.

+1
That's EXACTLY why i'm pushed to look at an alternate   

What i gather from all the responses yet is, there's a very mixed opinion about the Bigma whereas General Unanimity about the L.

There's a Canadian Gentleman who's put-up my Dream Lens on sale at FM for $1750/- i'd pick it up in a heartbeat but for the price  

Yes it starts at 120mm but its such a different animal altogether, imagine putting a 1.4x on it & yet have an incredible 168-420mm at f4

I wouldn't mind using my mid-range lens to cover everything uptill 105~120mm & then change lenses IF if was getting it for a low price, although i think $1750/- seems extremely reasonable for whats on offer.

Just that i desperately need money for other important purposes & therefore cant buy the f2.8, not yet atleast.

Which brings me back to 4x vs 10x      


User currently offlinecpd From Australia, joined Jun 2008, 4881 posts, RR: 37
Reply 14, posted (4 years 8 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 3230 times:

Quoting vishaljo (Reply 13):

Chris couldn't that be because you're a Full-Framer ?

No, that was back on the old D80. I never paired the 50-500 with the D700, so I have no idea how they work.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Suitable Tele-lenses And Zooms For Canon EOS 300D posted Tue Jul 13 2004 21:27:16 by Scanning
Suggestions For Spotting/photography In Spokane posted Sun Apr 18 2010 19:17:41 by micreaux
Any Tips For A New Photographer? posted Sun Apr 18 2010 17:16:26 by KLM77
Great Weather For Shooting posted Sat Apr 17 2010 03:48:03 by scbriml
PIA New Colours Update For The Photog's posted Tue Apr 13 2010 07:22:02 by JakTrax
200000 For My Top Photo posted Sat Apr 10 2010 01:40:18 by baldursveins
Question For Plane Spotters From Karachi posted Thu Apr 8 2010 13:57:14 by LovelyVirus
Biman New Livery Still For The Photog's? posted Wed Apr 7 2010 14:36:55 by JakTrax
Asking For Free Photos Impolitely posted Tue Apr 6 2010 09:03:27 by mat1979
Looking For External Flash For Cockpit Shots posted Sun Apr 4 2010 08:44:31 by Plainplane