| | S | M | T | W | T | F | S | | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |
1
|
2
| |
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
| |
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
| |
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
| |
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|  » Stats |
Members: 50,171
Threads: 82,383
Posts: 853,527
Top Poster: glsammy (15,069)
| | Welcome to our newest member, Stackyard | |  | | 
25-01-2008, 07:39 AM
| | Frozen | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Near Fakenham, Norfolk
Posts: 212
| | | Sigmonster
I know this lens has been reviewed a few times but is there anyone on this site that owns and uses one?
Your comments would be most usefull as I am seriously considering one or the Canon 600 mm
Cheers, Dave |
25-01-2008, 09:18 AM
| | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Hastings, Sussex
Posts: 1,056
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Remember to buy a wheelbarrow to carry it around in also!
Sorry can't help other than to post a silly comment  |
25-01-2008, 09:36 AM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: SE Northumberland
Posts: 2,120
| | | Re: Sigmonster
A mate of mine bought one of these last year and seems happy with it. It is one beast of a lens though, and does limit his mobility a lot.If I bump into him again soon i`ll try and find out more for you.
Mark H |
25-01-2008, 10:17 AM
| | Frozen | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Near Fakenham, Norfolk
Posts: 212
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Cheers Mark, much appeciated.
Dave |
25-01-2008, 12:15 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Basingstoke, Hampshire
Posts: 2,582
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Either way you are talking some serious money and consequently I have not been privileged enough to own either.
Both are monsters and as already mentioned you will need to budget for the wheelbarrow. The Sigmonster is over half a meter long,weighs in at nearly 6 kilo. maximum aperture f5.6. The canon 600mm is 100mm shorter and weighs in at half a kilo less, maximum aperature f4 and IS.
If the choice were mine I would go for the better image quality of the prime lens and not hesitate to go for the Canon EF600mm f4.0 L IS USM and reap the benefits of slightly better mobility, larger aperture and IS. Add a 1.4 convertor and you would retain AF and have a very nice f5.6 840mm lens.
The choice is yours but If I were to spend that sort of money on a lens I would want to rent them and try them out for myself before making a decision.
Gerry
p.s. have a look here there are some sigmonster size comparisons and images Equipment and Test Photos Photo Gallery by romy ocon at pbase.com
Last edited by GerryNick2; 25-01-2008 at 12:25 PM.
|
25-01-2008, 12:52 PM
|  | Commander of the Wild Empire | | Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: West Lothian
Posts: 2,432
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Quote:
Originally Posted by GerryNick2  Either way you are talking some serious money and consequently I have not been privileged enough to own either.
Both are monsters and as already mentioned you will need to budget for the wheelbarrow. The Sigmonster is over half a meter long,weighs in at nearly 6 kilo. maximum aperture f5.6. The canon 600mm is 100mm shorter and weighs in at half a kilo less, maximum aperature f4 and IS.
If the choice were mine I would go for the better image quality of the prime lens and not hesitate to go for the Canon EF600mm f4.0 L IS USM and reap the benefits of slightly better mobility, larger aperture and IS. Add a 1.4 convertor and you would retain AF and have a very nice f5.6 840mm lens.
The choice is yours but If I were to spend that sort of money on a lens I would want to rent them and try them out for myself before making a decision.
Gerry
p.s. have a look here there are some sigmonster size comparisons and images Equipment and Test Photos Photo Gallery by romy ocon at pbase.com | Very interesting Gerry.
Romy Ocon's site is certainly worth a look. He is certainly not short of 'hardware'.
John D  |
25-01-2008, 01:15 PM
|  | Wild Member | | Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 156
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Quote:
Originally Posted by gfilmsuk I know this lens has been reviewed a few times but is there anyone on this site that owns and uses one?
Your comments would be most usefull as I am seriously considering one or the Canon 600 mm
Cheers, Dave | Dave, I know someone whith this lens but its so heavy he has hardly used it. Go for the Canon and a teleconverter for the extra reach. Artie Morris uses this combination to great effect.
Peter |
25-01-2008, 03:01 PM
| | Frozen | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Near Fakenham, Norfolk
Posts: 212
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Many thanks. Yes I am familiar with the size, price and weight etc the only thing I haven't done is tried it, as you say, hiring one might be the answer in order to evaluate.
I am leaning towards the Canon even though it is considerably more expensive but it's the sort of purchase you only make once.
You may like to have a look at this guy's pics taken with the lens-pretty impressive. romy ocon's Photo Galleries at pbase.com
Dave |
25-01-2008, 03:04 PM
| | Frozen | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Near Fakenham, Norfolk
Posts: 212
| | | Re: Sigmonster
Just realised that I've given you the same link that you gave me. Well it is Friday! |
25-01-2008, 03:06 PM
| | Frozen | | Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Near Fakenham, Norfolk
Posts: 212
| | | Re: Sigmonster
One question I have from your comments. Would you still use the IS with it tripod mounted? What are the benefits of this?
Dave | | | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
| | |
| » New Wildlife Posts | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | » New Environment Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Activity Posts | | | | | | | | | » New Community Posts | | |  Spammers! Yesterday 01:53 PM 8 Replies, 189 Views | | | | | |
