arbitrage wrote:
EXIF doesn't show from Flickr embeds. You have to use the forum's upload feature (available to paying members) to have the EXIF show under the photos.
This ended up being a pretty friendly Killdeer. I saw him about 20 yards off so I sat on the ground and just started taking photos of him as he foraged for insects in the grass. He just started walking towards me and kept on coming close enough that I couldn't fit him in the frame and in one of the photos you can actually see my reflection in his eyes. I thought for sure he'd come within the MFD of the 500PF but he stopped just short.
After he got his closest he slowly went back the way he came and I waited until he was far enough where I wouldn't spook him when I got up and left.
Hey guys,
(Just found this forum and seems to have a lot of good stuff)
I tried to quickly search posts if anyone has changed from Sigma 150-600mm C or S to this lens and is it worth it ? Couldn't find too much, maybe I had bad search terms...
Anyways, my biggest hate towards Sigma's lens ( I have the C model) is the AF. Seems to hunt quite a lot and sometimes feels like getting stuck that I need to focus somewhere way closer/farther than where my subject is and then come to back (or spin manual focus).
I have been using the lens with Nikon D750 and recently D500. Where I think D500 AF engine made things slightly better but there's still lot of room for improvement.
If there's people with first hand experience I would like to hear from them. And other comments are welcome as well.
It could be due to the maximum aperture. With the Sigma the maximum aperture is 6.3 for the long end and this is smaller than the 5.6 that Nikon requires for most AF points to work. When I use the 500/5.6 with 1.4x TC, quite often I too need to spin the manual focus ring to assist the AF. Without TC I cannot recall that I ever had to give it manual assist except when shooting through branches.
I think the 500 PF's AF is very good by itself (no TC) and the lens is sharp wide open so that gives it an advantage. In low light (e.g. 1/200s, f/5.6, ISO 25600) occasionally there can be slight hesitation before the AF spins into action, but usually it is reasonably fast. f/4 and f/2.8 lenses are still faster to initiate AF action and provide more cross-type points but I think the 500 PF does a very good job AF wise.
With your Sigma, try to limit to center AF point only and see if that helps. That is what I do when using the 500 with TC.
It was a pretty good weekend of photography. Heavy fog on Saturday made for some amazing landscape opportunities, while a bit of luck fell in my lap as I found a loon nest within two miles of my home. Having never photographed a loon on a nest, one can only imagine my excitement. I've spent about 30 minutes in the mornings and an equal time in the evenings trying to capture this Minnesota icon. I have purposefully limited my shooting time, as I do not want to spook the pair as they try to raise a clutch near a pretty busy lake.
More to come as I do more post work.
cheers,
bruce
kapseli wrote:
Anyways, my biggest hate towards Sigma's lens ( I have the C model) is the AF. Seems to hunt quite a lot and sometimes feels like getting stuck that I need to focus somewhere way closer/farther than where my subject is and then come to back (or spin manual focus).
Have you used the Sigma Dock to adjust it, or are you using it generic, straight out of the box?
