A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » Aviation Images » Aviation Photos
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT(ish) Sigma vs Tamron



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 18th 07, 11:53 PM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Just Plane Noise[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 383
Default OT(ish) Sigma vs Tamron

On Sat, 18 Aug 2007 08:54:40 GMT, Bob Harrington
wrote:

"Peter.D.Evans" orbscure.AT.hotmail.DOT.com wrote in
.109.144:

Are any of you photographers out there using either the Sigma 50-500
or Tamron AF 200-500 lenses? My plan is to purchase either for use
on a Nikon N80. If you are, I'd appreciate your thoughts with regards
their use for airshow display photography - and some examples of your
work using either posted here would be great too please!


I have a Bigma for my K-M Maxxum 7D and am pleased as punch with it. Other
than the Popeye forearm and ruined back from horsing that beast around, that
is...

Having that 10:1 zoom range is a real plus when dealing with large and small
planes, close and distant fly-bys and taxiing, etc.

Image quality is pretty darned nice, though I am optically challenged as a
bat so my opinion may not be worth all that much.

I will post a series of shots taken with the above rig just last weekend
under the heading "Sentry Eagle Nighthawk" in a few minutes|hours|days|eons.

Bob ^,,^



Hey Bob, I was just going to ask you about the Sigma since I'm finding
the 75-300 with my Sony doesn't reach quite far enough sometimes.
After seeing your Nighthawk pics, I gotta check out the Sigma!
  #2  
Old August 20th 07, 11:48 AM posted to alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Bob Harrington
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 681
Default OT(ish) Sigma vs Tamron

Just Plane Noise wrote in


Hey Bob, I was just going to ask you about the Sigma since I'm finding
the 75-300 with my Sony doesn't reach quite far enough sometimes.
After seeing your Nighthawk pics, I gotta check out the Sigma!


The Bigma ain't cheap, and it does weigh in at well over 4 lbs - but I love
it anyway. Mine suffered an internal boo-boo a few weeks after I purchased
it that required a warranty repair trip back to Sigma. They fixed it and
had it back to me in less than two weeks, and it's worked perfectly since,
two and a half years.

Only problem now is that, being a zoom, it has managed to suck in a little
dust that has settled on internal lens elements. Not enough to affect image
quality, but it does annoy me a little when I clean the beast. Not quite
ready to send it in for a deep cleaning yet; perhaps a run through the
washing machine on the 'delicate' setting will suffice...

Bob ^,,^
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sigma Tek Altimeter and VOR, carbon fiber cloth 100 feet, .... [email protected] Home Built 1 February 14th 05 10:33 PM
Sigma Tek Altimeter and VOR, carbon fiber cloth 100 feet, .... [email protected] Aviation Marketplace 1 February 14th 05 10:30 PM
Sigma Tek Altimeter and VOR, carbon fiber cloth 100 feet, .... [email protected] Instrument Flight Rules 0 February 14th 05 08:26 PM
Sigma Tek Altimeter and VOR, carbon fiber cloth 100 feet, .... [email protected] Aerobatics 0 February 14th 05 08:24 PM
RC Allen vs Sigma Tek? Robert M. Gary Piloting 1 March 20th 04 01:22 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.