[missbirdphotos] Re: Birding on Saturday
- From: Robert Smith <rsmithent@xxxxxxx>
- To: <missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 11:41:16 -0500
Hello Larry - I'm attaching an overview of my thoughts & experiences with the
Bigma that I wrote almost 2 years ago. If someone had not stolen all of my
camera gear last year, I'd own a Bigma now, but I ended putting all my
"discretionary" money with the insurance money to replace/upgrade what was
stolen instead of adding to my pile of gear. I find autofocus with the Bigma
to be a bit "slow" compared to my "fast" glass, and especially slow when
married to a teleconverter. I don't see the Bigma plus a teleconverter working
well for a quickly moving subject - not saying it can't be done, but
bird-in-flight shots would be tough with it when the background isn't clear
sky. Anyway, here's what I wrote 2 years ago... I had the chance to use a
Bigma for a little over a
week this past summer, and I'd promised to share what I thought, so here it
is...
INTRODUCTION
I thought I’d share my recent experience with
the Sigma 50-500 (affectionately known to many as the “Bigma”). I went on a
week-long wildlife photography trip to Minnesota with our friends Cathy &
Gordon Illg. There was a LOT of on-line imagery available from this location,
and I was able to look at a lot of EXIF data from those shots. Apertures used
for shots that I liked ranged from f/6.3 to f/18, and lens lengths ranged from
85 to 500 mm. I certainly had this covered with a combination of my existing
lenses. However, not very many shots needed the length of 400 or 500 mm. And
changing lenses in a fast-paced wildlife shooting environment has caused many
missed shot opportunities in the past.
After careful thought (and
consideration given to the thought of flying WITHOUT having to carry a big
lens)
(and consideration given to several friends’ recommendations who had shot with
this lens in the past), I rented a Sigma 50-500 (without VR) from Lens Rentals
dot com for two weeks.
Of course I was out of town when the lens arrived, so
it sat at Fed Ex for 5 days while I itched to try it out. Once I got it, I
looked it over carefully, packed it in a bag, and took it with me while I went
to work on a property in northern North Carolina. As I was leaving the property
that day, I got my first chance to test the lens – a young woodchuck was
standing on his hind legs sniffing some purple asters right in front of my
truck. I quickly took off my short lens, dug the Bigma out of my bag and
attempted to put it on my body. It wouldn’t go on!!!! Yikes!!! I’ve put a Bigma
on that same body before when we’ve had clients shooting in the bird blind, so
I
knew it should go. I looked at the mount, yes it looked like a Nikon mount, but
it wouldn’t go on! What a pain!
By this time, the young woodchuck was LONG
gone! I continued to wrestle for a moment, and decided to try it on my D70. It
went on like a champ! I tried the D3 again – no go. It took me a moment to
figure out what was different, and it was the Arca Swiss plate that I had put
on
the lens foot that was causing the problem. It stuck back far enough that it
wouldn’t let the D3 turn to lock onto the lens, but with the smaller D70, it
was
no problem. I dug out my Allen wrenches, remounted the Arca Swiss plate a
little
further out, and no problem from then on! I took a few shots of indigo buntings
& mourning doves on power lines, and saw that the lens was functioning like
it should!
I then packed everything for the plane trip north. We carried a
pair of 28-80 mm and 70-300 mm, an 80-200 mm, and the Bigma (50-500 mm) along
with a 1.4x and a 2x teleconverter for our “long” lenses on this trip (plus 37
pounds of shorter lenses, tripods, & other gear in a checked bag). It sure
was nice not having to “push” the carry on baggage limits to carry a 400 mm and
a 600 mm (I carry one and my wife carries the other) when we boarded the plane.
It was also nice not having to carry the full-sized Wimberley gimbal head for
the tripod in checked baggage as well. (Of course we carried enough other “odd”
photo and outdoor gear that the Department of Homeland Security checked our
bags
going and coming anyway… ).
Once in the north woods of Minnesota, I started
out using the 80-200. But when I needed a longer lens, I went to the 50-500 and
kept it on for most of the rest of the trip. Yes, there were times I went to
the
80-200 (or even a shorter lens), but I kept coming back to the 50-500. At
times,
I switched between trying to shoot a song sparrow feeding young or a red-winged
blackbird on a perch over a nest right back to shooting deer, foxes, or other
wildlife within 5 seconds – no lens change needed!
I used the 50-500 on a
Really Right Stuff ballhead on a tripod, on a Wimberley Sidekick gimbal mount
atop the RRS ballhead, handheld, and on a beanbag. Handheld was the most
flexible (and tiring), but in the late afternoon & early morning, a tripod
or other support was needed badly at longer focal lengths. The
Sidekick/ballhead
combination worked well, except when I changed lens lengths significantly after
balancing it for a given lens length. The ballhead alone didn’t work that well
for me. Using a big beanbag out the truck window worked just
fine.
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Just for grins & giggles, I looked
up the technical specifications on the Bigma and the 3 lenses of mine so that I
could compare their “reach out & get ‘em” capability and their
length/weight.
Magnification on a full frame camera body
Bigma 50-500
– 1x to 10x
400 f/2.8 – 8x
80-200 f/2.8 – 1.6x to 4x
600 f/4 –
12x
Maximum Aperture
Bigma 50-500 – 22
400 f/2.8 – 22
80-200
f/2.8 – 22
600 f/4 – 22
Minimum Aperture
Bigma 50-500 – 4.5 to
6.3
400 f/2.8 – 2.8
80-200 f/2.8 – 2.8
600 f/4 – 4
Minimum
Length
Bigma 50-500 – 8.6 inches (at 50 mm, it is ALMOST twice that long at
500 mm)
400 f/2.8 – 14.5 inches
80-200 f/2.8 – 7.4 inches
600 f/4 – 17
inches
Weight
Bigma 50-500 – 4.3 pounds
400 f/2.8 – 10.2
pounds
80-200 f/2.8 – 2.9 pounds
600 f/4 – 10.7 pounds
Minimum
Focusing Distance
Bigma 50-500 – 19.7 to 70.9 inches
400 f/2.8 – 110.4
inches
80-200 f/2.8 – 58.8 inches
600 f/4 – 220.8 inches
The
technical specs were pulled off the Sigma & Nikon web sites; the exact specs
on my gear are a little different because I’ve changed the lens mounting foot
on
my 400 f/2.8 and put camouflage material on both of my lenses, but they’re
pretty close.
Even though many people complain about how big & heavy the
Bigma is, I found it to be a small & convenient lens compared to the “big
glass” in my bag. The Bigma is about the size of my 80-200 in length and
weight,
but has more versatility in some respects. What the Bigma lacked was a wider
open aperture that would reduce the importance of things in the background at
times and (perhaps most importantly) allow for more rapid autofocus. Autofocus
speed is related to the amount of light that passes through to the sensor, so
the wider the aperture, the more rapid the focusing potential.
MY
THOUGHTS
Cons:
Slow focus – The autofocus WAS slower than on my 400
f/2.8 or my 80-200 f/2.8, but with preplanning/prefocusing, I was still able to
capture a shot of a quickly running mink and cougar using autofocus. I would
NOT
want to use it for “snap” shots or for flight/running shots where there were
gaps in the vegetation where I had to focus and get the shot.
Lack of
“wide open” aperture – There were times that I would have liked to use a wider
open aperture to isolate my subject more. This lack of a wider aperture also
caused to some degree the slower autofocus issue.
The lack of a wide open
aperture would REALLY bother me if I had an older camera body, but as long as I
have a newer camera body with great high ISO capability, I'm fine using it. I
would have hated to have had to use the Bigma on my D70 where ISO 200 is as
high
as I'd go; however shooting it on the D3 at ISO 500 to ISO 1250 was fine.
Without a newer body, I don't think I'd have been pleased with the
Bigma.
Changing lens length changed center of gravity – This one really
bugged me. I think all of my other variable length telephoto lenses that have a
collar are internal focus. As I changed lens lengths with the Bigma, it changed
in physical length (much like the 70-300). The difference in size and weight
between those two lenses & the total length the Bigma extends results in a
BIG change in the center of gravity. So, if I had my camera body/lens
combination balanced on the tripod head for a 500 mm shot, but then changed to
a
150 mm length, my lens wanted to point up. Similarly, if I went from short to
long, my lens wanted to point down. A seemingly minor thing, but after having
been able to balance “big glass” on a Wimberley gimbal head or even a ball
head,
it was very aggravating to me.
Lens attachment – The foot that was on the
tripod collar for the Bigma only had one hole to attach to a tripod/tripod
mounting plate. Since the tripod heads that I was carrying (ball head and
Wimberley Sidekick) both had Arca/Swiss mounts, I put an Arca/Swiss plate on
it.
Since I knew: 1) that I’d have to adjust the lens back & forth a good bit to
balance it and 2) that there were times that I’d want to attach an external
flash bracket to the Arca/Swiss plate as well, I used an 8” Arca/Swiss plate
(which caused my initial mounting problem with the groundhog). If the tripod
foot on a lens is over 3” long, and the lens is “heavy”, it should have two ¼”
20 tpi female holes to mount the plate with – especially if another 2 ½ pounds
of flash accessories will be on that same plate. The plate only slipped twice
during the week, but that is two times too many as far as I am
concerned.
Camouflage – I didn’t really need camouflage on the camera
gear on this trip, but I didn’t feel comfortable camouflaging a rental lens
(other than putting it in a shirt sleeve…). If I was going to use this lens for
waterfowl or turkeys, I’d sure want to break up that black cylinder as much as
I
could. This isn’t a con of the lens, but more a con of RENTING the
lens.
Pros:
Small size – While people talk about how big and heavy
this lens is, the small size (to me) was GREAT for carrying on an airplane &
for walking/hiking.
Finger grips on foot for “handle” – While I didn’t
like only one mounting hole in the lens foot, really did like the finger grips
in the foot for a more comfortable “handle”.
Extremely wide range of lens
lengths (magnification) in one lens – I really liked the wide range of
magnification in the one lens. While I didn’t shoot it side-by-side with my
other lenses at given lengths to compare it’s sharpness, it was sharp enough to
produce images pleasing to me.
SUMMARY
I wouldn’t want this to be my only
“long lens”, but I’d like to have one for a “carry” lens. That is, a lens that
I
could carry on a body in my truck, a long lens that is easier to carry onto a
plane, or a lens that I can carry on walk-abouts. When I’m working out of my
truck, I usually either have the 80-200, the 400, or the 600 mm lens
pre-attached to a body & ready to shoot. Unfortunately, I often have the
wrong lens attached. Sometimes you need a 200 mm lens and sometimes even the
600
mm lens isn’t quite enough; having this lens would provide an opportunity to
get
shots that would otherwise be missed. It would also be a good lens to carry to
an event with my family. Rather than having to change lenses when alternatively
wanting to take a picture of my daughter or a flying plane, I could just use
the
one lens.
Overall, I was happy enough that if I see a Bigma for a real
deal, I'll end up owning one, just for those times when I need to travel
lighter. It'll be interesting to see how that compares to some of the Bigma
owners' thoughts in this forum.
Robert Smith
336-339-3497
rsmithent@xxxxxxx
www.photobiologist.com
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 06:49:29 -0800
From: larrypace64@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: [missbirdphotos] Re: Birding on Saturday
To: missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Several of you have mentioned the Bigma. What are your thoughts on pros and
cons for this lens. I think part of my problems have to do with lack of reach
with the 100-400. particularly on the smallest subjects. I have to crop way
too much.
I am aware that most problems related to quality photos are related to poor
technique but equipment does matter especially in NATURE photography.
Does the Bigma allow autofocus when using tele-converters?
Larry
From: Frank Hensley <dr_frank_hensley@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2012 6:49 AM
Subject: [missbirdphotos] Re: Birding on Saturday
I plan to go! First day of Spring Break so I asked for time off at home. Look
for a tall guy with a gray goatee and a BIGMA.
From: "Dance, Gayla" <dancegf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <missbirdphotos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, March 8, 2012 6:22 AM
Subject: [missbirdphotos] Birding on Saturday
I believe there is a birding event on Sat. near Turcotte Labs and Highway 43.
Weather permitting, I wondered if any of the MissBird Photographers were
planning on attending.
gayla
Other related posts:
