Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
3/8/2011 11:42:17 AM EDT
Anyone compared the Sigma 170-500MM to their big 50-500MM? I used a borrowed 50-500 last year for eagle pics and was happy with it, but I've been seeing the 170-500 for over $500 less-I'd be using it more at the long end anyway, so the loss by not going down to 50 isn't an issue. "Eagle season" is about to kick into high gear here as I'm watching four nests that have eggs in them, if I can get a halfway decent lens for not a lot of money the rest can be spent on other activities(ammo, hunting season, beer, steak).
There's a 170-500 on ebay that ends tonight with a current bid of $311-great price if it takes pics similar to the other lens. I'm aware it's slower than the "better" lenses, but if it's at least close to the bigma I'll be happy.
3/9/2011 8:42:54 PM EDT
[#1]
Depending on how often you use lenses that long, renting is an option.
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2009/11/lens-rental-review-series-conclusion-7.html
3/10/2011 3:49:29 AM EDT
[#2]
Quoted:
Depending on how often you use lenses that long, renting is an option.
http://www.ronmartblog.com/2009/11/lens-rental-review-series-conclusion-7.html


Based on reviews I've seen I'll be buying the lens.(not that individual one, but similar). There are 4 eagle nests I watch and I use long lenses almost every day of the summer so renting anything would add up fast.
3/10/2011 2:20:00 PM EDT
[#3]
I would avoid the 170-500.  Get the Bigma if you want a 500.
Actually, were I you, I would look into the Canon 400mm f5.6 (assuming you shoot Canon).