phule Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Just saw this over on dpreview.com http://www.dpreview.com/news/0801/08013101sigma250500.asp The lens comes with it's own TC for 400-1000mm f/5.6 shooting and a lithium battery to power the monster. I guess if you still can't get close enough you probably just need to set the camera down for a while. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 30, 2008 Author Share Posted January 30, 2008 "its own" and "just need to set the camera down for a while and enjoy the view." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jautey Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Is a pack mule include or is it extra? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 30, 2008 Author Share Posted January 30, 2008 Eric, Sigma will be rolling out their new "Hire-a-Sherpa" program in the next few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_margolis Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 Rob, it really does look pretty neat but c'mon, it is about 35 lbs. And no VR (or OS as they call it). Forget hand holding this lens, how many tripods can hold it? Very neat for shock factor but I wonder about its practicality. Nevertheless, I would be curious about the price. And I give Sigma a lot of credit. I have never owned a Sigma lens but they have made incredible strides in the past year IMO. Nice to see they stick their neck out, so to speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jautey Posted January 30, 2008 Share Posted January 30, 2008 "Sigma will be rolling out their new "Hire-a-Sherpa" program in the next few months." Damn funny. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 30, 2008 Author Share Posted January 30, 2008 Bruce, Canon's 1200mm lens didn't have IS, weighed about the same amount, and they sold more than a couple! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
les_barstow Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 500mm f/2.8 !?!?! That's a lot of lens - I guess one of Sigma's designers thought the Sigmonster wasn't big enough. And a definite LOL on the "Hire-a-Sherpa"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Doo Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 The weight makes me shudder! I can't see how it can be practical as a wildlife lens unless one stays put on a spot. Mary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 [[unless one stays put on a spot.]] Exactly! Mount a 1.6x crop camera on the back and you end up with 1600mm. You don't need to go to the wildlife, it will be right in your frame. :) Or, if you feel you /must/ get closer, the optional truck-mounted turret system can be added for a reasonable price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
les_barstow Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 What are those two eyelets on the top? Is Sigma designing a lens crane to go with this thing? Mary, I don't know of many people who walk around with their 600mm lenses, either; anything this big is pretty much designed to stay in one place after it's set up. Think of the low-light opportunities that this lens plus a D3 would make! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Two23 Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 The 50-500mm is the "Bigma." Someone has already dubbed this one the "Sigmasaurus." Kent in SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank uhlig Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Worst: no tripod collar! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photo_dark Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 So... I'm assuming you would need lens-mount bracket vs. just mounting the camera body on the tripod? Either way, certainly not the most practical size-wise (I won't be taking it hiking) but looks like it would be a fantastic sports or wildlife lens. I wonder how much it costs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_margolis Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 This is why I wondered about how practical it will be. Obviously it has to be mounted on something very strong for support or resting on something. A typical tripod setup certainly won't work. No doubt they will sell some but the cost will be far beyond the hobby budget. Think many $$$$$$$. Still it has to make Sigma feel good that sports and wildlife photogs will be talking about it. That alone may stir some interest in their other lenses. At least I think that is their hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 [[A typical tripod setup certainly won't work.]] Here's the similarly heavy Canon 1200mm on a tripod. http://dvinfo.net/canon/images/images17.php Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Doo Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 <b><i>"I don't know of many people who walk around with their 600mm lenses, either; anything this big is pretty much designed to stay in one place after it's set up. Think of the low-light opportunities that this lens plus a D3 would make!" </b></i> <p>Nice thought, Les. :) But at 35lbs and measuring 29" x 9" (compared to Nikkor 600mm's 11 lb), it will knock the daylights out of anyone trying to lug it around! LOL! <p>Mary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken munn Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Not sure I could afford the UV filter, let alone the lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mark_chappell Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I see lots of people walking around with 600 mm lenses. They aren't usually backpacking miles from the trailhead or bashing through really rugged terrain, but walk they do. But as M D said, there's a big difference between an 11 lb lens and a 35 lb lens over your shoulder. I think the intended audience for the 200-500/2.8 is sports, especially night or indoor big- stadium events, where a long reach and lots of light-gathering ability are important and easy transportability isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_mattes Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Does anyone remember the S-M-C Takumar 6x7 800mm f4 telephoto for the Pentax 6x7 camera??.. It weighed in at 17,600g or 38.77 lbs..Was produced in the 1970's..Pentax made more then a few as you see at least 1-2 per year for sale on e-Bay..Reportedly has significant chromatic aberration.. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phule Posted January 31, 2008 Author Share Posted January 31, 2008 There is also the Nikon 1200-1700 f/5.6 http://blogs.reuters.com/blog/2007/07/18/unleashing-the-beast And in October 2006, Zeiss released a 1700 f/4 that was 564 lbs. http://www.dpreview.com/news/0610/06100101zeiss1700f4.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anson_ko Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 at 35lbs, I will buy two for weight training.... one left and one right. perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennisgg Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 It makes me think of the Governator (Aaaahhhhnold) in the beginning of the movie Commando carrying the log on his shoulder. Dennis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greg s Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 I had to dig up last year's 200-500 carry system. http://www.pbase.com/richardr/image/75419029 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mary Doo Posted January 31, 2008 Share Posted January 31, 2008 Oh, it <b>is</b> a wildlife lens! <p>Mary (LOL! LOL!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now