PDA

View Full Version : Damn ebay and auction sniper....



herc182
07-01-2007, 02:25 PM
Well there we go. I was bored, wanted a lens, and bloody got it.
Got the sigma 18-50 f2.8 macro version.....

Really wanted it but cant afford it :mad:
However, it was a god price (144) so not complaining too much.

anyone with this lens, can you let me know what aperture gives best results for it? or any tips for using it....(limitations!).

I am mad yet happy at the same time....there is still a tripod and flash to get...:D

Rooz
07-01-2007, 05:05 PM
you'll love it. good buy.
http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1850_28m_nikon/index.htm

herc182
07-02-2007, 01:37 AM
Now i have to sell my 18-70mm (which i actually really like) although will hold of to see if i actually like the sigma.

Now i need something to get the telephoto range :D

Then like i said a flash and tripod.....what?

Rooz
07-02-2007, 01:42 AM
flash isn't too hard. sb600 or 800 depending on your budget. i;m more than satisfied with the power/ recylce time of the 600. although when i buy a 2nd i will certainly get the 800. andy is a lighting master so flashes you're better off talking to him about.

tripod, 055 or 190pro with 322rc2 head.

telephoto...well your spoilt for choice it wont be easy to pick one. i went thru a couple before i settled with the VR.

coldrain
07-02-2007, 02:04 AM
anyone with this lens, can you let me know what aperture gives best results for it? or any tips for using it....(limitations!).

Don't use a lens with "sharpest aperture setting", just use the lens with the aperture appropriate for your photo!

The correct depth of field will do a LOT more for a photo than the lest drop of resolution.

The Sigma 18-50 is quite sharp over the entire aperture range, just do not go past f14 unless you have to have a very deep field of view.

herc182
07-02-2007, 02:13 AM
Don't use a lens with "sharpest aperture setting", just use the lens with the aperture appropriate for your photo!

The correct depth of field will do a LOT more for a photo than the lest drop of resolution.

The Sigma 18-50 is quite sharp over the entire aperture range, just do not go past f14 unless you have to have a very deep field of view.

Yeah fair point. I bought the 2.8 for creativity really. However, it made me wonder why the primes are so much more expensive when you are only getting one focal length. I love my 35mm f2 dont get me wrong but is the quality that much better from a 20mm f2.8 or 28mm f2.8?

I must admit i love the 35mm as it makes me work harder for my shots with composition.

herc182
07-02-2007, 02:14 AM
flash isn't too hard. sb600 or 800 depending on your budget. i;m more than satisfied with the power/ recylce time of the 600. although when i buy a 2nd i will certainly get the 800. andy is a lighting master so flashes you're better off talking to him about.

tripod, 055 or 190pro with 322rc2 head.

telephoto...well your spoilt for choice it wont be easy to pick one. i went thru a couple before i settled with the VR.

Well i have a wish list and the SB-600 and 190 pro are on it....cant remember the head but it was a ball joint one...

will leave the telephoto for when my credit card companies stop calling me and asking it the card is still in my possession :p

coldrain
07-02-2007, 04:33 AM
Yeah fair point. I bought the 2.8 for creativity really. However, it made me wonder why the primes are so much more expensive when you are only getting one focal length. I love my 35mm f2 dont get me wrong but is the quality that much better from a 20mm f2.8 or 28mm f2.8?

I must admit i love the 35mm as it makes me work harder for my shots with composition.
The Sigma will probably be BETTER than most wide angle primes, like a 28mm f2.8 Nikon.

herc182
07-04-2007, 12:43 AM
Heres a question. The Sigma 18-50 arrived. I was playing around with it and realised that i can focus on things that are almost touching the glass. Is that right?! it says 20cm.....even at the telephoto end!

tcadwall
07-04-2007, 12:50 AM
20cm would be from the sensor. So yes, you can get pretty freakin close. Not real familiar with the lens, but that is what the measurement means. Working distance is different, it is measured from the front element to the subject, that would be less.

herc182
07-04-2007, 04:12 AM
RIghto. I remember that funny symbol on the top of my camera from which that must be measured from.

that is damn impressive! will definately have to get a UV filter on it!

herc182
07-05-2007, 02:06 AM
Question:

If the sigma used the camera motor to focus, does that not mean the battery will be drained quicker?

So far the lens seems to make a lot of noise!

Thanks

Rooz
07-05-2007, 02:32 AM
i haven't noticed any battery degredation so far. my sigma is noisy aswell, so was the tamron 17-50mm f2.8 i had.

K1W1
07-05-2007, 03:02 AM
Question:

If the sigma used the camera motor to focus, does that not mean the battery will be drained quicker?

So far the lens seems to make a lot of noise!

Thanks

All lenses use the camera battery to focus. The difference is some lenses have their own focus motor (Nikon SWM or Sigma HSM) and some use the focus motor in the camera body.
Lenses with VR generally use a bit more battery than lenses without as they are powering several extra motors as well as the focus one. I have shot over 700 photos with my 55-200VR since last week and the battery charge meter still hasn't moved of full so I guess the difference on newer lenses at least is negligible.

coldrain
07-05-2007, 04:22 AM
How is the Sigma working for you? Rooz likes it...
I am jealous... I only have the older, less impressive version.

I still would not put an UV filter standard on it though, it is not like you will always get very close to everything just because you can...
Just always put the sun hood on it, that gives protection, and helps avoid flares from bright light sources just outside of the field of view.

herc182
07-05-2007, 05:05 AM
I seem to go through the batteries quite quickly. I took about 600 odd photos in Rome, and went through two batteries. One nikon genuine and one off ebay. However, i do change settings very regularly (i.e. aperture obviously, white balance, focus points, metering, iso,) which i guess must drain battery quicker. My brother took about a third of the photos and never changes settings (apart from aperture) and his battery barely moved off full (canon 5D).

coldrain:

Have not had a chance to use it much yet. I must admit i never use the lens hoods. Maybe i will put it on this one and see how it fares. First impressions are that its fairly heavy, noisy, focuses fairly quickly and seems to take good photos (good bokeh). however, i think i might miss the extra length i got from my 18-70mm!

will experiment on the weekend and post some photos back here.

Rooz
07-05-2007, 05:12 AM
I seem to go through the batteries quite quickly. I took about 600 odd photos in Rome, and went through two batteries. One nikon genuine and one off ebay. However, i do change settings very regularly (i.e. aperture obviously, white balance, focus points, metering, iso,) which i guess must drain battery quicker. My brother took about a third of the photos and never changes settings (apart from aperture) and his battery barely moved off full (canon 5D).

that shouldn;t effect battery life much at all cos i change the exact same things. i'd say this is more to do with you reviewing the images, and how long you review them for, on your main lcd. thats where the battery drain is, not on your top lcd panel.

herc182
07-05-2007, 06:00 AM
to b honest i do check histograms and highlights (the flashing option) throughout. Worth wasting the battery for IMHO. review is set to 3 secs i think.
Would definately check the histogram after every decent shot....

mystery solved!

tcadwall
07-05-2007, 08:06 AM
herc what format are you shooting... jpg fine, raw, both?

I *think* my batteries are lasting longer now that I am shooting raw... No scientific study on it or anything. But I also review my images, histogram, etc. And it seems I can easily get more shots than you are reporting... With the 18-200mm VR (with VR on almost ALL of the time - I do not shut it off to save battery, etc.). If I am getting more shots in raw it does make sense that the tradeoff of more write - time - vs - much more processing engine would conserve battery. For that short period of time when I was shooting raw+jpg my battery went real quick.

Just another variable to consider - especially if you are shooting RAW+JPG

herc182
07-05-2007, 08:20 AM
I was shooting mainly JPEG and only very few RAW (at most 10).

I am a bit miffed as to why it ran down "so" quick. I was doing a fair bit of night shots one (or actually two) nights with exposures of aroun 15 secs....

Think I might start another thread about this!