Sigma "Bigma" OS for D80

<p>Good Day Everyone,<br>

I wish to develop my photography skills in the field, quite literally, of nature photography. I own a Nikon D80 and enjoy it very much. I have been interested in adding a telephoto lens to my bag and the Bigma seems to be great value. I have read all there is to read on the internet, so now I would like to ask all of you who actually own this lens: Should I or should I not but this lens?<br />Any feedback would be most welcome<br>

Thanks<br>

Ben</p>

 

<p>If you are lucky and get a good sample, I think Sigma's are great value for money. Best thing would if you can test the lens before you buy it. I have the 150-500 mm OS and I have to stop down to f/11 in order to get sharp images at 500 mm so you need a lot's of light also.<br>

-Pekka</p>

<p>If you don't have great light, you will have trouble focusing at the long slow end.</p>

<p>Ben - </p>

<p>I've owned that lens for about 3 years now - my copy is sharp enough for the sports work that I do. And the occasional nature shoot. </p>

<p>It is a heavy lens though - so you might take that into consideration - especially if you're hiking all day with it. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>Not.</p>

<p>If you want sharp images with some reach at a reasonable price, get Nikon's 80-400mm VR lens. It is not much more expensive used that the Bigma lens options that give you 500mm reach. 'Sharp enough' usually isn't and you should not have to 'stop down to f11' to get good images. My 70-300mm VR upsized images were sharper and had better color and contrast than the 500mm images I got from my 50-500mm at 500mm.</p>

<p>I got a Bigma several years ago and used it with my D200. I found the pictures to be a bit soft at the long end and I didn't use the short end all that much because I had better lenses in that region. So I put it on the shelf.</p>

<p>When I got an FX camera I tried the Bigma out and found the pix to be a bit better because of the larger pixel size. I now use it regularly. Yes, it's slower to focus than a lot of my other lenses, but it does work. I take photos purely for my own enjoyment and don't try to sell them.</p>

<p>You might take a look at the Sigma 150-500. You don't get the extreme range of the Bigma, but you probably have other lenses for the short end. A zoom with a shorter range probably doesn't have the same tradeoffs as the superzooms. I don't have one so I can't tell you how it compares. The big/heavy characteristic of the Bigma probably comes from the long end, so the 150-500 will probably be similar.</p>

<p>Thanks all who replied. Much appreciated. I will let you know what I decide.</p>

<p>Elliot -</p>

<p>The 50-500 is a completely different lens than the 150 - 500. </p>

<p>I have personally not shot the 50-500 - so I can't / won't comment on it. </p>

<p>I have the 150-500 - and apparently I got a good one. </p>

<p>I had (past tense) the 80-400 nikon - as a somewhat popular you tube video from 3 years ago said - "That lens needs a makeover worse than R.O.!" - I found it to be very slow AF and soft in almost every range - thus that one went bye-bye and I kept the Sigma.</p>

<p>Just because a lens is made by Nikon - or has the Nikon brand on it - it's not automatically "Good". Same for Sigma - just being a Sigma - doesn't make it bad. </p>

<p>A lot of it is - how are you going to use the lens? If you blow up 100% of a small section on a regular basis - then your answer is going to be different than a person who regularly uses 80-90% of the frame for an enlargement. Kind of like buying a small front wheel drive car and then whining that it doesn't go through 2 feet of snow like a 4x4 pickup with weight in the back...</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>David, I have the 80-400mm lens and mine is sharp throughout its zoom range. AF is slower than other Nikon lenses unless you use the focus limit switch, at which point it becomes reasonable (but still not fast). I have never used the 150-500mm so I can't comment on it. Nor did I. But it seems that Pekka's comments your comments are typical of Bigma users. I am not super picky as I only make select poster sized prints but 'sharp enough' may or may not be good enough for Ben. It wasn't for me. Given the size and weight of the lens, and the IQ varying based on photographer reports/standards, his best bet is, if he decides on purchasing it, would be to buy it from a store that accepts returns. He may like it as many do. He may not as many do.</p>

<p>How about the Sigma 300-800mm...? That one seems to be highly regarded by bird photographers...</p>

<p>rdc</p>