Akos
I have to disagree on the general disparagement of Sigma. Do you have any
reason to dislike them?
Yes, the 200-500 is a silly lens. The 300-800 f/5.6 (while optically great)
was also too big for most field work. But Sigma does make many very fine
lenses.
Great photo by the way.
Alistair
On 10/11/2008, <>
wrote:
>
> Hi Belinda,
>
> Personally I would stay well clear of Sigma especially. (All lenses) The
> one in question here is just a hype and has no real world useablity in the
> field unless you want to mount it on a pick-up truck and sure, it sounds
> fabulous. For birds, you rarely would want 200mm anyway!
>
> For the price of this beast, you can probably buy two or three 500mm f/4L
> IS USM from Canon and the quality of build and image will blow your socks
> off. I had the pleasure of playing with the Canon 500mm a couple of weeks
> back and it is a world above anything I have ever used/seen.
>
> Here is one with the Canon 2x at 1,000mm - used a 1D MkIII as well.
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/birdsofsydney/2991198508/sizes/o/
>
>
> I would highly recommend you stick with Canon. :)
>
> Cheers
> Akos
>
> ===============================
> www.birding-aus.org
> birding-aus.blogspot.com
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
> send the message:
> unsubscribe
> (in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
> to:
> ===============================
>
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
