p.1 #1 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
Thanks to help here on FM, I was able to get a Sigma 300-600. In fact with upgraded shipping, I was able to get it next day after being told who had one in stock and just in time for some high school football that night.
First a little background and my reasoning for wanting to get this lens. I have the Sony 400 and it's my sports workhorse, but sometimes, it's just not long enough or it's too tight. A few guys I shoot with carry the 600 f4 for longer reach and a 300 for closer subjects and then maybe a wide angle lens. I really hate to carry 3 bodies, so was hoping to find a solution with 2 lenses. I started seeing some YouTube videos about the Sigma 300-600 (I swear my phone is listening to me sometimes) and was intrigued Two things bothered me though. F4 was going to be challenging for high school stadium lit fields and the 15 FPS limitation would be an issue. Like all things photography, there are always tradeoffs. I would certainly miss the AF speed of the 400 prime vs the Sigma (Bigma II I've heard it called) and the 30, 60 or even 120 FPS of the Sony lenses. But would they be deal breakers. Bottom line is I may sell my Sony 400.
Some shots and commentary.
One of my first shots of a somewhat willing participant. Looked good to me.
Later that evening, I headed out for some football. Typical HS Field with typical setting of iso 8000, 2.8, and 1/1250 or so. So, with the f4, it was time to boos the ISO a bit and slow the shutter speed.
This was 1/800, f4 and ISO 8000 on the Sony A1. A bit of noise is easy to clean up in LR and really 8000 is fine. But how far could I push it.
So, when the sun was fully down, I was at ISO 12800, 1/800 and f4. Still cleans up really well in LR.
My next photo opp was some HS soccer on an unlit field and tested the Bigma II with the a9v3. This was at 450mm or so, iso 500 and 1/2000.
It was nice zooming to 600. ISO 8000, 1/1600
1/3200, ISO 1600 and about 500mm. My settings are really all over the place for this game as I was playing around some and trying to deal with an unlit field in partial full shade and partial full sun. It might be ISO 200 in parts and 2000 in other parts at the same time.
Couple of observations. It's a big lens. Bigger and heavier than the Sony 400 but the monopod bears most of the weight so not a big issue. But if you are carrying it through the woods for birding, it may be an issue for you. . The handle is nice with a bit of padding and the arca mount built in. The zoom throw is opposite to what my muscle memory tries to do so that will take a bit of time. I did miss some shots as I zoomed the wrong way and got way to tight. No fault of the lens though. The zoom throw while not short nor long, does take a bit of work to go from 300 to 600 or vica versa. Speaking of zooming, with many years of shooting the 400 prime, I still need to remind myself that zooming is an option. Zooming and shooting at the same time will take a bit of practice to not throw subjects out of the frame. Saturday I give it a go for the Ark vs TN game. Game time is 415 so field should be in full or nearly full shade by game time and transition into stadium lights by the end of the game. The lights are OK, about ISO 4000, 2.8 and 1/1600 to 1/2000 or so. So, I'll probably be at iso 8000 which is fine. I'm not sure if the A1 or a9v3 is the better body for faster AF with the Bigma II.
p.1 #3 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
Great shots, Tim. I fell hard for that lens when I tested it out at work. If my knees and back were in better shape, or I had access to a pack mule, I would've happily made it my hiking super-t.
p.1 #4 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
I wonder if there are prohibitions against a pack mule at football games. Thanks again for the heads up on the vendor.
freaklikeme wrote:
Great shots, Tim. I fell hard for that lens when I tested it out at work. If my knees and back were in better shape, or I had access to a pack mule, I would've happily made it my hiking super-t.
p.1 #6 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
timgangloff wrote:
I wonder if there are prohibitions against a pack mule at football games. Thanks again for the heads up on the vendor.
Anytime. I have no problem pointing people to Kenmore. It's always a great experience with some of the nicest people in the business. And I doubt there are strict rules against pack mules, but I would expect some push back, none the less. Maybe an emotional support pack mule?
p.1 #8 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
photo325 wrote:
Was it as sharp as your prime Tim ? I have heard very positive things about this lens and that first shot of the dog looks very sharp 👍
It's close enough for me. And I pixel peep. I think I may miss a shot or two due to a slightly reduced focus speed of the zoom vs the prime and the slower FPS, but when it's on, it's just as sharp or so close I can't really tell.
p.1 #10 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
robert614 wrote:
Looks good Tim!
Thanks for sharing your impressions!
How’s focus accuracy? I would imagine you get a few more missed shots. But anything that prevents you from getting the job done?
Yep, I missed a few shots because it's a bit slower than the Bigma II, but I also got some due to the versatility of the zoom. It's close to a wash with maybe enough of an edge to the Bigma II to get me to sell the 400.
p.1 #12 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
schlotz wrote:
Since I read it's not parafocal, ie will not focus while moving the zoom, did you have any difficulty with that? BTW: stop temping my right hip pocket
I didn't notice the parafocal issue, but perhaps because I'm still getting used to the zoom rotation (opposite to my muscle memory) that I generally zoomed to range I wanted and didn't zoom much during the action while also shooting. I should pay more attention to that, but even if that's an issue for some or even a deal breaker, it's not for me. I like the versatility. After shooting Ark vs UT Saturday, I didn't notice it to be an issue, but again not sure I even tried zooming and shooting simultaneously. It's quite possible that a few of my out of focus shots were when I was trying to do so, but I didn't really keep track. Pretty sure that the 400 is going on B&S forum at this point.
p.1 #13 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
Wow, putting up the 400 for sale says a bunch! Not certain how I feel about dropping to 15fps. More about loosing the option than actually missing a capture though.
p.1 #14 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
schlotz wrote:
Wow, putting up the 400 for sale says a bunch! Not certain how I feel about dropping to 15fps. More about loosing the option than actually missing a capture though.
Yeah, is definitely a trade off. I definitely feel the hit. And anyone could look at my prior comments on this board and see my hypocrisy. I've always been a lover of the more FPS, the better. Especially so with my a9 3... oh well.
Thinking about baseball. Sometimes the 400 was too tight shooting batters from 3rd base. And sometimes the 400 was too short for outfielders without big crops. The 300-600 is probably unusable for basketball as it's just so big and would be cumbersome on the baseline. I don't shoot golf very often, but it's probably a better lens for golf. I also enjoy shooting wildlife whether in Florida or out west and it's probably better there too. The 200-600 was good for these but it can't do night sports, so it was sold to help pay for this one. Same for the 100-400.
I am now considering selling my 70-200 and going with the 50-150 and 300-600 as my two bodies. I seldom carry a third. I know you like your 50-150 and I'm starting to see a few folks carry them as their second body at football games. I was initially opposed to that lens, but now rethinking my lineup. I dare say I could have been wrong about that lens. And it will fill my need for occasional speed.
But the versatility of the Bigma II helps me get the shot more than the loss of the FPS. Of course, YMMV.
p.1 #15 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
The 50-150 does have it's place and you are right I do love it. However, one has to be mindful when using it as it can easily lead you into extensive cropping which is not usually a good idea. Back to Bigma II (300-600), since the soccer season here is winding down, Sat is the last home match, the plan is to rent this lens for extensive testing this coming spring. Got to get comfortable knowing the expected demand shots are still there with the 15fps. Judging by your examples, it looks very promising.
p.1 #17 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
timgangloff wrote:
Yeah, is definitely a trade off. I definitely feel the hit. And anyone could look at my prior comments on this board and see my hypocrisy. I've always been a lover of the more FPS, the better. Especially so with my a9 3... oh well.
Thinking about baseball. Sometimes the 400 was too tight shooting batters from 3rd base. And sometimes the 400 was too short for outfielders without big crops. The 300-600 is probably unusable for basketball as it's just so big and would be cumbersome on the baseline. I don't shoot golf very often, but it's probably a better lens for golf. I also enjoy shooting wildlife whether in Florida or out west and it's probably better there too. The 200-600 was good for these but it can't do night sports, so it was sold to help pay for this one. Same for the 100-400.
I am now considering selling my 70-200 and going with the 50-150 and 300-600 as my two bodies. I seldom carry a third. I know you like your 50-150 and I'm starting to see a few folks carry them as their second body at football games. I was initially opposed to that lens, but now rethinking my lineup. I dare say I could have been wrong about that lens. And it will fill my need for occasional speed.
But the versatility of the Bigma II helps me get the shot more than the loss of the FPS. Of course, YMMV.
p.1 #18 · First shots with the Sigma 300-600 - Mostly sports
schlotz wrote:
The 50-150 does have it's place and you are right I do love it. However, one has to be mindful when using it as it can easily lead you into extensive cropping which is not usually a good idea. Back to Bigma II (300-600), since the soccer season here is winding down, Sat is the last home match, the plan is to rent this lens for extensive testing this coming spring. Got to get comfortable knowing the expected demand shots are still there with the 15fps. Judging by your examples, it looks very promising.
With regard to extensive cropping - one would have to be using a camera body with higher resolution, meaning, 40mp+
