Canon 5D Mk II

[Gruditch]

With regards to bye bye to hand-holding I was referring more to the sigma 150 Paul was asking about. I know lots of people shoot hand held with 100mm range lenses.

There is of course the Sony's body stabilisation which might make it doable.

Not really, as the 150mm does not come in a Sony mount.

I'm hoping that the 70-200 F/4 IS, with an extension tube will be the business.
Lisa is funding that lens though, so I will have to sneak it in my bag.

Gruditch

[FISHiEE]

Yeah the 70-200 F4LIS is another I am looking at for motorsport and also for falconry centres, big animals on safari etc. IQ to die for, top IS and I believe it focuses quite close too. Trouble is that is about a grand too now whereas a couple of weeks ago it was about £650... come on £ get your ass in gear and show that Yen what for!!!!

The Sigma 150 doesn't come in sony fit? Is that really true? I thought you could get sony fit for all sigma lenses? Oh dear that is bad...

[eccles]

Not really, as the 150mm does not come in a Sony mount.

I wasn't sure about this, but regrettably I think you're right, Gary. It's an odd omission by Sigma. New independent macro lenses available for Sony are Sigma 50/70/105/180 and Tamron 90/180. There are also very cheap 1:2 100mm versions like Vivitar and Cosina around that regularly appear on the s/h market.

Oh dear that is bad

Annoying but not a show stopper. I have a Sigma 105mm + Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC that gives a similar working distance to the 150mm at 1:1, and can go closer to 1.4:1, albeit at F4 maximum aperture, but it works well enough, is still very sharp and is a lot lighter than the 150mm.

[Gruditch]

I find the mind set of Sigma to be quite perplexing. There's Sony, a firm that has a real lacking in the long range lenses, Yet Sigma choose not to make their 300, 500, and 800 primes, and their 300-500 and 300-800 in a Sony mount.
Plus not one of there top lenses has OS yet, and they seem to be making less EX lenses.

Gruditch

[eccles]

You can get a Bigma (50-500mm EX) in Sony mount. I think some of the other zooms to 400mm and 500mm are available too, but not EX quality. I have the Sigma 100-300 F4 EX which adapts well to a 1.4x TC. And if you have deep pockets there is the Sony 300mm F2.8 which will match the Sony 2x TC and autofocus at 600mm. So it can be done but you're right, Sony has a peerless range of wide angle glass but it really should get its long range stuff in gear.

[eccles]

I just checked. Sigma make 300mm f2.8 and 500mm f4.5 in Alpha mount. The 800mm f5.6 is listed in the Dyxum website but I can't find it in Sigma UK or Japan.

[Gruditch]

Not listed as such on Sigma UK site, so I if doubt you can get them over here.
I do seem to remember, some of the longer lenses being in more than just Canon and Nikon mount, so maybe they have only recently stopped doing them.

The 120-300 F/2.8 had better reviews than the 300 prime, yet I hatted it.


Funny when I first started down the DSLR journey, I was convinced that long lens wildlife photography was for me. As it turned out, I hate sitting there waiting for something to turn up, and I hate lugging a massive lens and tripod about.

Much prefer to wonder about, with my 100-400 around my neck, and get whatever I get, not a lot usually.

Gruditch

[eccles]

Jessops list the 300 and 500 as available for special order, but whether any UKB member could afford one in ANY mount is another thing. The 300mm at £1,500 is probably just about affordable for an amateur's budget.
Sony does have one little ace up its sleeve though, with its unique AF 500mm mirror lens. Its affordable at around £450 and is the only autofocus reflex lens currently manufactured. AF is very accurate, and just about quick enough to keep birds in flight in focus if you can get them in the viewfinder quickly enough. You do have to put up with the slightly odd out of focus highlights that appear sometimes, and you're limited to a fixed F8 aperture, but a Bigma is only 2/3 stop brighter at 500mm, and the light weight of the mirror means you can carry it around all day. It's perfect for small birds. I use it quite successfully with a monopod with the legs retracted just to add a bit of stability, and the in-camera steady shot does the rest. It's quite sharp and a lot of fun.

[Gruditch]

Roger has the 500mm Their not that expensive. You would faint, if you knew how much mine and Lisa's kit combined, came too.

Gruditch

[FISHiEE]

Very bizarre on Sigma's part. I would think they's make a killing from Sony users as their lens range is quite limited. Perhaps the KM brand had a very small following so they stopped making lens for that mount and haven't got back into the habit yet?

I'm with you Grudditch. I am not a sit in a hide and wait person at all. I just want to go and find stuff

[NickB]

I'm with you Grudditch. I am not a sit in a hide and wait person at all. I just want to go and find stuff

You know - my fiancee says to me "Why not find a flower and set-up the tripod and wait for the butterflies to come to you?" when I complain about not getting sharp enough shots..

My response is the same - find the butterflies first; photos come second! I too just want to get out and explore! (Still the big kid, I'm afraid )
N

[eccles]

Well, that's three people with the wrong kit then.
My current mobile birding kit is Sony A700 + Sony 500mm AF mirror + Jessops monopod = 2.2Kg. Light, image stabilised, sharp, totally unique and best of all, affordable. Stick the beercan zoom with Canon (!) close up lens in the bag for butterflies and I have the complete wildlife kit weighing about 3Kg.

[Bill S]

With regards to bye bye to hand-holding I was referring more to the sigma 150 Paul was asking about. I know lots of people shoot hand held with 100mm range lenses.

There is of course the Sony's body stabilisation which might make it doable.

Not really, as the 150mm does not come in a Sony mount.

I'm hoping that the 70-200 F/4 IS, with an extension tube will be the business.
Lisa is funding that lens though, so I will have to sneak it in my bag.

Gruditch

Hi Gary

Am I right in thinking you are thinking of using that 70-200 with extension tubes for butterflies ? What size tube would you suggest?

Thanks again

Bill

[eccles]

Bill, the size of tube will depend on the size of butterfly you want to photograph. I'd suggest a set of Kenko tubes. They're good quality and you can stack them if you wish for different magnifications.

[Gruditch]

No we use Canon not coffee manufactures

I use a Canon extension tube EF25 II which works excellent with the 100-400mm.
I'm thinking that the 70-200 F4 L IS, in combination with the extension tube, would be an excellent set up for butterflies.
It's light, has fantastic IQ, and the best IS you can get. But it aint a cheap way to do Macro.

Gruditch

[eccles]

No we use Canon not coffee manufactures

Hmm, hence the continual complaints about weight, I guess.

iR2380i_100_tcm14-513421.jpg (23.68 KiB) Viewed 367 times

[Bill S]

No we use Canon not coffee manufactures

I use a Canon extension tube EF25 II which works excellent with the 100-400mm.
I'm thinking that the 70-200 F4 L IS, in combination with the extension tube, would be an excellent set up for butterflies.
It's light, has fantastic IQ, and the best IS you can get. But it aint a cheap way to do Macro.

Gruditch

No but it might be a cheap way to do macro and moving bikes?

Bill

[eccles]

No Bill. £850 is not a cheap way to do anything.
But buy it if you already have Canon and can afford it as it's probably a fine lens.

[Bill S]

No Bill. £850 is not a cheap way to do anything.
But buy it if you already have Canon and can afford it as it's probably a fine lens.

Arh yes you're right I meant cheaper (than buying a dedicated sports lens and a macro lens)!

Bill

[FISHiEE]

Bill S: For motorsports/bikes I thinik the 70-200 would be a dream. I use the 100-400 for that right now but sometimes 100mm is too long and Irarely need anywhere near 400. 70-200 is sharper, wider and with much better IS.