Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
in search of a good wildlife lens
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="BackdoorArts" data-source="post: 85999" data-attributes="member: 9240"><p>I've been using a Sigma 150-500 with my D7000 for over a year now and think it's a great lens for wildlife. I do a ton of backyard birding and it's been perfect. My <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/backdoorhippie/" target="_blank">Flickr Photostream</a> is chock full of that combination if you want to take a look. Most of these were taken handheld as well, though 1/2 the owl shots were on a monopod.</p><p></p><p>That said, my brother (who shoots Canon) just picked up the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and I'm starting to wonder if that'll be my next lens. He's a newspaper photographer and has used it for sports, with and without a 2X converter, and he loves it. Rugged lens too - in the middle of shooting US Open Tennis it fell to the ground face first when his monopod lost its balance against a rail. While I wouldn't recommend this test, the lens hood absorbed enough of the shock that while it needed repair the lens didn't (and the crash was loud enough to get a rather ugly glance from Andy Murray). </p><p></p><p>The one thing I'd say about the 120-300 is that it's significantly heavier. Would be a tough haul out in the woods and you're going to need to go into weight training to handhold it. But the idea of that and a 2x next time I'm out somewhere shoot in the wild is very tempting.</p><p></p><p>And for what it's worth, Sigma service is excellent. The AF motor on the 150-500 stopped working after a year and they repaired it with a 10 day turn around. Can't beat the warranty.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="BackdoorArts, post: 85999, member: 9240"] I've been using a Sigma 150-500 with my D7000 for over a year now and think it's a great lens for wildlife. I do a ton of backyard birding and it's been perfect. My [URL="http://www.flickr.com/photos/backdoorhippie/"]Flickr Photostream[/URL] is chock full of that combination if you want to take a look. Most of these were taken handheld as well, though 1/2 the owl shots were on a monopod. That said, my brother (who shoots Canon) just picked up the Sigma 120-300 f2.8 and I'm starting to wonder if that'll be my next lens. He's a newspaper photographer and has used it for sports, with and without a 2X converter, and he loves it. Rugged lens too - in the middle of shooting US Open Tennis it fell to the ground face first when his monopod lost its balance against a rail. While I wouldn't recommend this test, the lens hood absorbed enough of the shock that while it needed repair the lens didn't (and the crash was loud enough to get a rather ugly glance from Andy Murray). The one thing I'd say about the 120-300 is that it's significantly heavier. Would be a tough haul out in the woods and you're going to need to go into weight training to handhold it. But the idea of that and a 2x next time I'm out somewhere shoot in the wild is very tempting. And for what it's worth, Sigma service is excellent. The AF motor on the 150-500 stopped working after a year and they repaired it with a 10 day turn around. Can't beat the warranty. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Lenses
Telephoto
in search of a good wildlife lens
Top