SIGMA 80-400 OS and monopod wrong way ?

hello

I am not satisfied about quality of my first shoots with a SIGMA 80-

400 EXOS (Canon 20D) when fixed on a monopod. I can see blur, bad

sharpening.

Is it a wrong way to use this zoom with the OS activated pos 1 when

fixed on a monopod ?

others tests without monopod, not very goods also...

How about posting a sample photo along with the camera settings/EXIF/metadata?

<p>I haven't used that lens. I've used a couple of Canon's IS lenses, the 300/4 and 28-135, and both work very well on monopods. I would be surprised if the Sigma didn't also work well with a monopod.</p>

 

<p>Like the previous poster suggested, an example or two, complete with EXIF data, would be useful. Then again, I was going to post an example that IS works well on a monopod, but there's no option to do so when I try to post this message, and I can't be bothered putting up a temporary Web page and linking to it.</p>

Well, I'll be...<br>I never noticed that this forum doesn't allow posting of photos.

If your camera with the lenses on is quite heavy then a monopod is not the best call.

 

I would recommend you a sturdy trypod.

<p>Sports photographers routinely use monopods to support much heavier lenses than the one the original poster mentioned ...</p>

Patrick,

when I took my first shots with Sigma 80-400 I was...well...not a very happy cookie to say the least. The pictures were not sharp, pure and simple.

 

Fortunately, instead of blaming the lens I took a good look at my technique (or rather the lack of it).

First, to confirm that the lens did not have defects, I took a number of pictures on a tripod. The pictures were SHARP.

 

On 20D, with 1.6 crop factor, you are effectively shooting 640mm. This means that the minimum hand-held (with a VERY steady hand) shutter is 1/640 sec. In reality, 1/1000 would be much better. With OS switched ON, you will need about 1/160 sec or (better) 1/250 sec.

 

The monopod will give you something like 1/320sec.

 

Of course everything depends on how steady are your hands. Bracing the lens (even on monopod), controlled breathing (no joke) and smooth shutter button engaging is the key. It works. My pictures are sharp now, and my copy of Sigma 80-400 is a SHARP lens indeed.

 

I just posted a comparison to Canon 400/5.6L and 300/4L. Have a look and draw conclusions yourself.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DXQp

Oh, and switch the OS off when using monopod...

Thank you fore yours answers, especially Leszek, your experience same as me and your link to the test was very helpful for me.

At the first time i tried the Sigma 80-400, i made the same conclusion as yours : The pictures are simply not sharp at all.

So why can we see a lot of reviews on the net that applause 10/10 for the excellent sharpening of this lens ? Perhaps their needs or standards are different?

I bought it with confidence about these reviews, and the fact that the Canon 100-400 IS was quite similar in terms of image quality. (examples pictures on Pbase confirm that)

 

Use of a tripod is impossible for me, I shot often sports, and most of time golf.

I used in the past the Canon 70-200 L4, not IS, on monopod, with always very good results, beautiful colors and sharpening, so I know technichaly how to take that kind of pictures in terms of speed, aperture and stability of hands.

 

So, I do the same with the SIGMA, and the results are very bad if I compare with the 70-200 4L.

Results so bad, quite not any picture to save, big deception, so I decided to return the Sigma to the seller, and try an exchange with a new copy. Perhaps I buy a bad copy ?

I will see again so, second chance, and try some tests especially on the monopod, without OS.

But if it works well like that, I pay the OS for nothing ?

That is the question ??

 

But I need the extra reach of 400 mm.

Perhaps a better choice/same price for my requirements will be not a zoom, but a prime like the Canon 400 L 5.6, and not OS or IS, but a monopod only (300 L4 too short).

This conclusion based after watching the Leszek test (Canon seems clearly better at 5.6) and also after watching and compare attentively number of pictures on Pbase take with the Sigma 80-400 and the Canon prime L lenses at about same price or a little more.

When I see for example shoots of Gary Stephenson with the 20D / Canon 400 L 5.6

 

http://www.pbase.com/gary/nissan05

 

It seems to be clear that this lens is much more better than Sigma 80-400. Many 80-400 shots are not sharp at all? (quite same for the 100-400 IS?)

 

But all that is not a definitive jugement, I will try again, and also, if someone can show me sports pictures almost as good as those of Gary and taken with the 80-400, I will revise it and work again tests shots to be sure of my choice.

 

I will post a link to some of my bad shots with the Sigma in a next post this evening (in France?)

here 4 examples about what i mean

 

All of course without traitment or any sharpening (view at 100 % please)

 

First, a shot i thing very good at 1/1000 sec aperture 4 with the 70-200 L4

 

http://asafgolf.free.fr/IMG_1685.JPG

 

then, 3 shots with the Sigma 80-400 OS activated, on monopod.

 

first, this portrait, in my opinion very different of the previous in terms of quality, not sharp, and with a terrific blur around the withe edges (the tee in the mouth, horrible...)speed 1/500 aperture 5.6

 

http://asafgolf.free.fr/IMG_2661.JPG

 

second, a shot at speed 1/400 aperture 7, same problems

 

http://asafgolf.free.fr/IMG_2119.JPG

 

finally, a shot at speed 1/600 aperture 5.6, also not sharp, very inferior quality compared to shots of Gary with the 400 5.6 Canon first.

 

http://asafgolf.free.fr/IMG_2630.JPG

 

 

There is a subjective aspect, of course, in the appreciation, but to simplify, the problem for me is only that : buy the 400 5.6 Canon or the 80-400 Sigma for sharpen golf shots, What is the best choice ?

( perhaps I have to put this question on a Sports photography forum...)

 

thank you for attention and help.

Les, focus speed is most likely way better on Canon bodies (I am comparing my experience with your description). Sigma 80-400 focuses as surely (if somewhat slower than Canon 100-400) on 1V body. It may, however, be significantly slower when going from close to far focus (or vice versa), but this is not a big deal, after some time I just got used to prefocusing a bit.

Where the big difference is - it is the tracking. For practical purposes it is of no much use (although I managed to get 1 excellent shot in 10, which may not be a bad result if you consider fast flying birds).

 

Note that I haven't really tested the tracking performance on other subjects - like cars, it may be better.

 

But this is a lens for static or slow moving subjects (maybe 20 mph). Other than that - you have excellent sharpness, good contrast, reasonably fast focusing. In fact, after a comparison between Sigma 80-400 and Canon 100-400 in the shop on a 1V body - I bought the 1V, because the AF performance was so much better than on 7e.

So, for birds in flight I got Canon 400/5.6 L. The AF speed (initial focusing and tracking) is awesome ;).

You may want to have a look at couple of my previous posts on the subject:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007sA5

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=007wjO

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=009NL8

No, I am not talking to myself. Just posted the above in the wrong thread...

Patrick, try without OS. The image stabilization system on this lens is NOT designed to work with tripods or monopods.

 

The #2661.JPEG appears to be have some movement in it, plus the focus appears to be on the right shoulder. Can you check the focus point ? I hope you haven't been using automatic focus point selection.

Thank you again Lesek for yours advices and interesting links to previous posts, very instructive for me.

As i see your shots and tests with the 80-400, it is clear it is not a bad lens.

effectively, you have noticed, as me, that sometimes the focus seems to be good but out of center, but the focus point was well made at the center. It was also an interrogation for me about the quality of my lens copy.

I read Melissa Eiselein , sep 04, 2004; 01:29 a.m. saying :

"The important thing is to get what works for you" and after all discussions and watching pictures, I think the better choice for me will be keep my 70-200 L4 with 1.4 extender, and buy the Canon prime lens 400 L 5.6.

As i said, I work most of time on monopod, with moving subjects, and often at maximum reaching distance (200 or 400) and maximum speed and aperture, so it seems i do not need OS or IS.

This configuration will cover all my needs, with a little less comfort than a big zoom, but with better quality, my priority.

My seller (very good policy return) has accepted the exchange for the Canon.

 

Thank you all, i hope show you soon very sharp (and intersting, not only sharp...) pictures

Good luck, Patrick, with your new lens ! I also have bought 400/5.6L - but not for the reason of sharpness. I have to admit, it took me some time to get really sharp pics out of Sigma - and I suspect that your first attempts with Canon at 1/400 sec may also be a little difficult. But - this is an excellent choice.