Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 26, 2007, 8:58 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
tiger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,696
Default

Trying out the Sigma 135 - 400 mm lens, was able to get a few bird shots. Jim
Attached Images
 
tiger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 26, 2007, 8:58 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
tiger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,696
Default

#2
Attached Images
 
tiger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 9:03 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
tiger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,696
Default

#3 Anyone know what kind of bird this is?
Attached Images
 
tiger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:07 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 42
Default

I like the photos very much. Thanks for posting.

The third bird looks like a curve-billed thrasher:

http://www.southwestbirders.com/thrashers.htm

In the USA, found mostly in southern Arizona and New Mexico, and in southwestern Texas. I don't think I've ever seen one in person, so to speak.

Will
Polytrope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:10 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Maw Harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Default

Jim, I believe #3 to be a curve billed thrasher. All three shots are wonderful,,,
Maw Harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:13 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Maw Harley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 123
Default

Ooops,,, took to long to finish my post. :G.

Will, I tried that link but it didn't work. What site is it from????
Maw Harley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:31 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 42
Default

Maw, first link I posted - the long one you probably clicked - was defective. I've replaced it with a short link. Works for me here. Try it again and let me know. Here it is again:

http://www.southwestbirders.com/thrashers.htm

By the way, if I don't recognize a bird, I usually poke around in Sibley first. But this site can also be very helpful:

http://www.bdi.org/Birdkey/BirdSearc...?Area=AllAreas

Will
Polytrope is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:55 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
tiger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,696
Default

Thanks for viewing and the comments, and for the info Will. Jim
tiger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 10:57 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
tiger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 2,696
Default

Thanks for the comments Maw! Will agreed with you on the kind of bird, thanks to both of you. Jim
tiger98 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 26, 2007, 11:23 PM   #10
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 42
Default

tiger98 wrote:
Quote:
Trying out the Sigma 135 - 400 mm lens, was able to get a few bird shots. Jim
Jim,

There are apparently two versions of this lens available: the DG and the non-DG. Which do you have? Very little difference in price between them, although I assume that if I had a choice, the DG would be preferable. ("DG" is Sigma's designation for a lens that has been manufactured specifically for use with digital cameras.)

The reviews of the lens that I can find are generally positive, with some reservations. I'm never sure if the complaints don't come from people whose standards are unreasonable, given the lens's price. I've been thinking about this lens for over a week now and after seeing your pictures, I actually placed an order at Adorama - and then immediately wrote to cancel it so I can think a little more. Anyway, you've actually got it. What do you think? Is the auto-focus loud or slow? I gather that the lens is obscenely long when fully extended. Do you find that awkward? I assume it's possible to use the lens, especially at under 300mm, handheld, yes? Did you use a tripod for these excellent shots? And by any chance did you use a teleconverter when you took these shots, or were they taken with the lens alone?

By the way, I gather that shot #1 was taken at 400, while shots #2 and #3 were taken at 300mm. From the reviews I've read, I gather that this lens, like so many zooms, is at its best in the middle of its range, say from 200-300mm, and from f/8 to something in the teens. Do you find that to be the case? I like all three shots, but I think the first shot's image quality is a little lower than that of the other two - not enough though to cause me to be unhappy!

Sorry for so many questions. Good photos.

Will
Polytrope is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:52 PM.