in search of a good wildlife lens
- Thread starter jpgray
- Start date
Pierro
Senior Member
Slow - i was right, the Skywatcher and Orion scope are built by Syntra ( parent company ) and the Orion 80ED and Skywatcher 80ED have the same glass, but look a little different cosmetically. Skywatcher have slightly revamped their 80ED and it now has a B&W colour scheme instead of gold, and also has a dual speed focuser instead of a single focuser.
It makes no difference to the IQ
The Skywatcher is now called the 80ED DS Pro rather than just 80ED Pro for the older gold model. I suspect DS just stands for Dual Speed
It makes no difference to the IQ
The Skywatcher is now called the 80ED DS Pro rather than just 80ED Pro for the older gold model. I suspect DS just stands for Dual Speed
Just got my Sigma 150-500mm. I took a few pictures in the backyard to get a feel for it. The jury is still out but I will know more as I get to use it. My first impression is nice build quality. I wish the manual focus ring was a little further down the barrell. It's heavy at 4lbs 4.6oz. AF is somewhat slow and she likes a lot of light but that's some of the sacrifices you make for the relatively low pricetag. I don't plan on using this lens very often, but I when I do I think I'll be satisfied with the results.
Nice shot.
Can you let us know some info on that one please, ISO, aperture, and shutter speed ? Did you use a tripod ?
Thanks.
Pierro
Senior Member
Papa, assuming you have the OS version, weight of the Sig 150-500 is 3Lbs 12oz. You've made a good start with your shot, but there's an odd smearing to the bird, that has rendered the feather detail indistinguishable, especially on the chest. It could be that you wobbled a bit if you hand held, or the OS was on and you shot from a tripod, when of course OS should be off, but it could also be post processing.
None the less, i found that lens can produce some pretty good results, but its real fussy, and i never got 100% keepers on a shoot, even when i was used to its quirks and peculiarities
None the less, i found that lens can produce some pretty good results, but its real fussy, and i never got 100% keepers on a shoot, even when i was used to its quirks and peculiarities
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
As Pierro said, image looks very post-processed, as if you used a lot of noise reduction.
It can take some getting used to, but it can yield some really nice pics - even handheld - with the OS on. I've got a D7000 that I love, with my only real complaint being that the mirror slam can make taking clear photos a challenge at times. Here are a group of 3 photos taken during morning walks near my home. All are handheld with the D7000 and the 150-500 usually at full extension. I've learned you need to shoot at f8 to get consistently clean results and live by that. Hopefully the Exif data comes across, but just in case, realize that the photo of the young owl was shot at 1/80 sec with the lens at full extension. All were post-processed in Lightroom 3 only to adjust for noise and CA.
Take the time to get to know the lens and it'll treat you well.
It can take some getting used to, but it can yield some really nice pics - even handheld - with the OS on. I've got a D7000 that I love, with my only real complaint being that the mirror slam can make taking clear photos a challenge at times. Here are a group of 3 photos taken during morning walks near my home. All are handheld with the D7000 and the 150-500 usually at full extension. I've learned you need to shoot at f8 to get consistently clean results and live by that. Hopefully the Exif data comes across, but just in case, realize that the photo of the young owl was shot at 1/80 sec with the lens at full extension. All were post-processed in Lightroom 3 only to adjust for noise and CA.
Take the time to get to know the lens and it'll treat you well.
Attachments
No tripod, ISO 200, 6.3, 1/320
Yes Pierro and Backdoorhippie... the image was over processed. Just throwing on the lens for the first time and shooting in the backyard I chose that image to post up because there really was nothing else of interest. Just like anything else I'll have to work at it to get the results I want but I'm sure practice will yield good results.
Pierro, it is the OS version. On my scale with all the accoutrement it weighs in at over 4lbs. I'm not complaining.
Thanks for the tip BDH, I'll make the aperture adjustment.
Pierro, it is the OS version. On my scale with all the accoutrement it weighs in at over 4lbs. I'm not complaining.
Thanks for the tip BDH, I'll make the aperture adjustment.
Pierro
Senior Member
Yup, its one that needs learning alright. It wont take you long 
Apart from the processing which has messed up the feather detail ( easily remedied on your next shot ) the shot doesnt look too bad, but when viewing the bigger file, i notice that there is some softening , which i guess now you know is down to the f6.3 aperture used, as you have said you'll try upping that to f8.
Here's 2 shots i took at f6.3 when i had my first Sig 150-500 OS, back when i used a Canon 450/Rebel ( hisssssssss - booooooo !! ) Its not too bad for f6.3, and i was still getting to grips with the lens back then, but i have also owned another 150-500 OS with my D300. But you can see in those shots that the lens doesnt really like f6.3. It actually says f6.17 in the EXIF - weird
Apart from the processing which has messed up the feather detail ( easily remedied on your next shot ) the shot doesnt look too bad, but when viewing the bigger file, i notice that there is some softening , which i guess now you know is down to the f6.3 aperture used, as you have said you'll try upping that to f8.
Here's 2 shots i took at f6.3 when i had my first Sig 150-500 OS, back when i used a Canon 450/Rebel ( hisssssssss - booooooo !! ) Its not too bad for f6.3, and i was still getting to grips with the lens back then, but i have also owned another 150-500 OS with my D300. But you can see in those shots that the lens doesnt really like f6.3. It actually says f6.17 in the EXIF - weird
