As an avid proponent of doing due diligence, I’ve always encouraged people to do research on lenses before buying them. Whether it means renting them from vendors like LensProToGo, Rent Glass, or through vendor relationships, it’s a great way to get a first hand look on how lenses perform under a variety of circumstances. This was the case when I’d been the benefactor of a solid relationship with the folks at Sigma. I spent about a month kicking the proverbial tires on one of their latest lenses to hit the market: the Sigma 8-16mm lens. Continue reading “Hardware review: Sigma 8-16”
Category: Product Review
Hardware Review – Sigma 50-500mm
A while back I teased about a forthcoming lens review (nearly 3 months ago actually, in the Teaser Alert), and after several project shoots, the holidays, and scheduling delays, I am finally getting my act together to bring you the latest gear review…that of the Sigma 50-500mm. As a word of caution, you should be forewarned that the Sigma line-up of lenses that I have reviewed has become quite extensive. Right away this should tell you two things:
- Sigma has been quite generous with me in terms of making a variety of lenses available. They likely are doing this for a number of reasons, but primarily because they know that I will give a fair, honest, and 9 times of out 10, a positive review of their equipment.
- I like Sigma lenses! It should be no secret by now that I do like their lenses. They are optically on par with what one would expect from lens manufacturers by todays standards. Heck, sometimes I think the optical quality even exceeds that of the main brands out there (of course here I mean Canon and Nikon). The price is almost always right on – sometimes the price tag is a little high for my taste, but the advantage that Sigma has is that they are what is considered a “third party lens”, and because of that designation, their pricing is a notch below comparable lenses made by either Canon or Nikon for equivalent glass.
So, when Sigma came calling (actually I called Sigma), with the 50-500, the game face was put on. Right off the bat, here Sigma has been more than generous because I have now had this lens in my possession for nearly 3 months! I’ve posted a few photos from this lens over the past three months, so you may see some repeated images here, but they serve the purpose of demonstrating the various settings that I have used to shoot and test this glass. Having set the stage, let’s get started with the review. In the past, I’ve talked about things in terms of Pros and Cons, listing first the things I like, then the things I was not as much a fan of. While it has worked to a degree, I am trying to make things more uniform in the review section, so will start adhering to some more concise points and then indicating whether it is a pro or a con. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the
Sigma 50-500mm f4.5-6.3 Review
1. Focal Range: The focal range is how lenses are most commonly identified, and this is the measure of how much “zoom” there is in the lens. Here, the description says it all. This lens ranges from a widest point of 50mm to an impressive “zoom” of 500mm. On a crop sensor camera, that means you are looking at a range of 80 to 800mm! By any standard, this is a pretty wide range, encompassing a difference of nearly 700mm in focal adjustments. I am going to call this one a Pro.
2. F-Stop Range: The f-stop range is the measure of the minimum (or maximum depending on your way of thinking) aperture the lens can handle at various lengths. When dealing with a zoom lens, as you move further out, the elements have to compensate for the change in the length by increasing the size of the opening of the aperture, so you will see adjustments as the lens “zoom” increases. The Sigma 50-500mm is dialed in to a minimum aperture opening of f4.5 to f6.3. So, at the widest zoom of 50mm, the lowest aperture setting you can get is f4.5. Likewise, if you zoom this all the way out to 500, the minimum aperture is f6.3. So, don’t be misled by the numbers, shooting this lens at 500mm will not afford you the f4.5 that is capable at the widest setting any more than the f2.8 is available on a 70-200 at the longest zoom. When you have zoom lenses, there is a compromise in aperture capabilities that must be met when zooming out, and such is the case here. I did some experimenting at various focal lengths, and here are some apparent limits at different zooms:
| Focal Length | Minimum Aperture |
|---|---|
| 50mm | f 4.5 |
| 70mm | f 5.0 |
| 100mm | f 5.0 |
| 135mm | f 5.6 |
| 200mm | f 5.6 |
| 250mm | f 6.3 |
| 300mm | f 6.3 |
| 400mm | f 6.3 |
| 500mm | f 6.3 |
Given the technology of aperture limitations in zooms, I would say that the Sigma is on par with what the expectations would be for this range. To build this lens for any lower aperture settings would make the lens both heavier and longer. I don’t even want to think about what it would do to the price either! It’s not the greatest in aperture abilities, but it’s no slouch either. I’m going to have to thrown an “Even” flag on this.
3. Noise: I brought in the noise consideration based on my first Sigma lens I ever purchased, the 70mm Macro (f2.8) which did not have HSM. The inclusion of HSM in almost every lens since has been a Godsend. This holds true for the 50-500mm as well. It’s super quiet and has convinced me that I will never stray off the Hyper Sonic Motor (or USM on Canon glass, ever gain! ‘Nuff said. Pro
4. Size/Weight: My last big lens I reviewed here was the 18-250. It was a respectable weight, but this is by far the heaviest lens I’ve ever tested. Weighing in at a shade upder 4.5 lbs (that’s 1970 grams for you Metric folks), it can cause some serious arm strain after extensive shooting. I would recommend using either a monopod or a tripod for this lens whenever possible. It also bears mentioning here that due to the weight of the lens, you want to support it in the provided collar. Supporting the rig by the camera can result in some serious shear force, which can rip the lens right off the camera. Other size considerations involve the length of the lens both fully closed and fully extended. This will draw some eyes at either end…whether it be the short side (8.5″) or the long side (12″)! Here’s a comparison shot with it next to several other lenses so you can get an idea of its relative size:
Another consideration to take into account about this size is the filter required. For those interested in using the ND filters to protect front elements, you will need a 95mm filter to cover this – not a cheap thing to purchase by any means. Ultimately the size/weight considerations really will depend on your personal ability to handle it effectively. For me, most of the time it was not a factor, so I’ll acquiesce and call it a Pro.
5. Build Quality: In line with expectations, the Sigma quality showed here. Their now easily recognizable textured exterior exudes professionalism, and just feels good in your hands. Given the weight of the lens, you don’t want to hold this gingerly, but at the same time, if the body took a slight bump from another lens in your bag, the “other lens” would likely bear the brunt of it. No questions here. It’s a Pro.
6. OS/IS/VR: Due to the limited aperture range, and the weight, the presence of OS is invaluable. Using the OS allows you to keep your aperture value low, allowing for bother faster manipulation and shorter shutter speeds, as well as some nice bokeh in the background when your distances are good. What was extra nice about this is the ability to toggle between the vertical and horizontal planes to control vibration in different circumstances. When I was on a monopod, I switched to OS 2 to help control vertical (or up and down) vibration. When shooting handheld, I was on OS 1 most of the time, under the premise that my own face, body and camera holding helped to minimize the vertical and thus needed more help with horizontal. When I was on a tripod, I turned it off per normal procedures for when using OS/IS/VR. In my book, having versus not having OS/IS/VR is definitely a Pro.
7. Cost: The average retail market for this lens is approximately $1500. Given the focal range, the aperture range, and other considerations thus far, it seems to be pretty competitive. The Canon lens with the longest zoom range is their 100-400 and that factors in at $1800. Nikonians can salivate over their 80-400 for $1850. Both price in over the Sigma lens, and it still gives an extra 110-150mm of variable range. For my own personal budget, that’s a tougher call because while I would love to own this lens – I would have to sell something else to do so, and am not sure I want to dispose of anything else in my camera bag at the moment…the jury is out on this for me personally, but for those interested in purchasing any time soon: Pro
8. Image Quality: Image quality is always subjective to the viewer/shooter, so here I will just let everyone defer to their own tastes by sharing a few sample images taken over the last few months:
Miscellany:
Other features that bear mentioning here include the locking mechanism and the focusing rings. I thought about including the latter in the build quality, but decided to bring it in here for discussion. First, the locking mechanism is a handy feature to have for keeping the lens locked in place to prevent lens creep. The idea is a good one, but for this particular lens, it would not lock in the “zoomed” position, where I would have thought lens creep would be more of an impact, than in the “closed” position. Having said that, from the lunar shots I did (as shown above), the fully extended lens did not experience much, if any, creep. This could be because the lens was recently brought back from a service stop where knobs and buttons and toggles were all tightened and such.
This brings me to the focusing rings. The rear focusing ring is the one used for fine tuning and the front ring is for zoom. This was an adjustment for me as my other zoom lenses have these rings reversed (where the zoom is on the back ring and the focus is on the front ring). it forced me to change my style of shooting a little, but since I was working off a lens-mounted setup most of the time rather than a camera-mounted setup, my shooting habits were already being adjusted anyway. The last part is that the zoom ring did seem a bit tight to move. Whether this is by design or because of the recent factory adjustments, I am not sure, but it was just a tad stiff to adjust.
Summary:
All in all, the Sigma 50-500mm is a great lens. It stood up for the challenges of both wildlife and aerial photography, as well as lunar and even a portrait shot of the canine companion. The compression it exhibits at the far end (which is characteristic of these long zooms) is to be expected, but I would probably not be using this for landscapes unless I was in a pinch and had no other lens with me. Still, it could be done, depending on what kind of landscape you are trying to capture. The zoom really had no noticable effect on image quality without going into some serious pixel peeping, and thus, meets or exceeds all criteria that I can think of. I would definitely make a positive recommendation on this lens for either a wildlife or sports shooter where distance from subjects is often greater than 10-15 feet. (The minimum focusing distance at 500mm is something like 6 feet!)
That does it for today – I hope you enjoyed the review and photo gallery from the Sigma 50-500. Here’s the final results/scores I give the lens:
| Category | Score |
|---|---|
| Focal Range | 8 |
| F-Stop Range | 7.0 |
| Lens Motor Noise | 8.5 |
| Size/Weight | 7 |
| Build Quality | 9.5 |
| Optical Stabilization | 8.0 |
| Cost | 7.0 |
| Image Quality | 8 |
Have you shot with this lens? Share your own thoughts in the comments or with me via email. Likewise, if you have a lens you would be interested in having me review, feel free to drop me a line or share your requests through the comment area as well. Special thanks to Sigma for giving me such an extended testing period to review the lens, and we’ll see you here again soon! Happy shooting!
Hardware Review: Sigma 18-250
The subject of today’s post: The Sigma 18-250mm lens review! You read that right – Sigma has a lens that covers the range of 18-250. This allows you to go from relatively wide angle shots at the 18mm end to zooming pretty far in at 250mm on the opposite end. But, is the quality really there?
I took the lens through its paces over the weekend and here’s what I found out about the Sigma 18-250! In the interests of full disclosure, I should also note that this was actually requested by myself for review, and that I am not being compensated in any manner by the good folks at Sigma. So, this is, in fact, a loaner and I am required to send it back no later than June 26th. Since I will be busy next weekend, decided I should get the review shots done with this weekend so the lenses can be shipped back on schedule.
Pros:
- Weight – this has a nice solid feel to it. With I think a total of 13 elements in here, it’s no surprise that it doesn’t feel the slightest bit flimsy. The weight adds a certain durability, but I still took things carefully as this is only on loan from Sigma for the purposes of this review. Compared to the 70-200, it certainly felt heavier, but I am not sure what the comparative weights are. All in all though, I think the weight is a good thing.
- Noise – Excellent! My prior experience with Sigma is my own 70mm Macro, which does not have the HSM (hypersonic motor). That thing is NOY-ZEE! This, on the other hand, rivals the USM operation of Canon lenses. Compared to the 70-200L glass I own, the two are pretty close to each other in terms of silence in operation. The test I did for this was switch focus to manual, then take the lens all the way out to the opposite end of its last focus point. I then switched it back on to AF and listened for the motor operation. Sure, I could hear it when listening, but man was it quiet!
- Range – This is without a doubt, my most favorite element (bad pun) of this lens. The fact that I could go from wide angle work to close up work with such ease makes this an ideal lens for things like photo walks (which are becoming more and more popular), or for just a go-to lens on a regular basis without having to switch out.
- OS – Optical Stabilization – the equivalent of IS on Canon lenses. While I don’t own a Canon IS lens for direct comparison, I will say that it went a full stop faster than my 70-200mm CanonL f4.0 did at the same focal length/light. In a day and age where fast glass is becoming pretty much the standard, I would say this meets the mark.
- Size – This lens is remarkable compact – standing at almost half the height of my 70-200 comparison lens. Think about that – a wider range of zoom and half the length. I can store this vertically in my bag, saving precious cargo space for other accessories and accouterments. Alongside would be the 70mm Macro, the 10-22mm, lensbaby, flash and other such items. Very tempting for that reason alone.
- Feel – The signature brushed metal feel of Sigma lenses is present here and it just exudes “cool” and “professional”. No bells or whistles, no fancy L rings or anything, just brushed smoothness. Gotta love it!
- Image Quality – The bugaboo, the real deal, the end result – the pictures! So how does it stack up? Pretty well actually, but rather than wax on, I’ll just share some images I took for you to judge the IQ – just remember to distinguish IQ from compositional quality! 🙂 Here’s the results…
Cons:
- Weight – Yes, I am listing weight as both a pro and a con – the weight did get to me after a while of shooting on the 40D. While it’s durability is not in question at all, the heaviness can get on your wrist and forearm. I should put this qualifier out that I am still recouperating a tender arm from our move last July, which I am for the most part over, but it still flares up with extended use. So, things like shooting for a day can wear on me. Lighter is always better, but if I had to choose between durability and lightness, the former would win every time. Take what you wish from this con then…’nuff said.
- Cost – It retails at B&H for $529, which is always a big price tag to swallow no matter what you are buying. Then again, when you look at a comparable lens from Canon that has the OS/IS built-in, the Canon counterpart goes for almost twice that at $1025 (and you still don’t get the same range of focus). While it may be a lot to pay on first glance, you really are getting quite a bit of bang for your buck.
Truth be told, I couldn’t find much else to nit on. I also liked the fact that they made this lens so you can put the lens hood on while also leaving the cap able to attach. Don’t ask me why, but I like that… Believe it or not, the lens also performed fairly well with portrait work too. I did a few test shots with yours truly as the subject and even got one I liked! So, would I recommend this lens? Absolutely! To see a complete gallery of photos I took this weekend, including the portrait ones, and even a few of the moon last night with a TC attached), follow this link:
Sigma 18-250 Gallery of Images
Well, that should be enough content for the day (I know, my reviews are long-winded), so get out and shoot (with a Sigma if you like! 🙂 ), and we’ll see you back here tomorrow. Happy Shooting! Don’t forget – would love to hear reader thoughts and ideas for product reviews – let me know in the comments or via email!
Hardware Review: Hoodman Loupe
As mentioned previously in the monthly contest series post, this month the featured vendor is none other than Hoodman. Their patented and widely recognized CF cards and loupes are proudly made in the U.S.A. (the only ones I know of that can make this claim), and are virtually indestructible. They have generously donated one of their Loupes for the contest winner, and allowed me a chance to review it as well. So, without further ado – here is the latest in the hardware review category for the blog:
Hoodman Loupe
The whole purpose of the Hoodman Loupe is to block stray light from hitting your LCD. In sunlight or hazy scenarios, it can often be challenging to view your screen, and even change settings if you own a newer camera. Given it’s simple function, the review aspect of this really is a simple matter to determine, does it do the job it claims to do or not.
Not only did it completely block all ambient light with ease, the Hoodman Loupe also seemed to make the on-screen photo much more brilliant and crisp than I had remembered before using it. That surprise was further mitigated by seeing how compact the Hoodman Loupe actually is – at roughly 2 inches long and an inch deep. Not only did it perform adequately, but at this compact size, the Hoodman Loupe is an easy addition to your camera bag with the minimal footprint it takes up in space.
Most rubber or manufactured products attempt to make things slick of shiny and in so doing, the product becomes quite slippery and difficult to hold. Not so with the Hoodman Loupe, as the rugged rubberized exterior was nicely made, and I was pleased to get an easy grip on it. Although easy to hold when in use, I was not as thrilled with the ease of porting. The short trap that they provide to carry it around your neck is much too short for me. Now granted, I am 6’1”, but certainly no giant, and the size was just awkward for me. While the quick release snap does attenuate it to a certain degree, the idea of keeping it tethered somehow is a little more reassuring (I have a penchant for losing small items when taken away from my body…LOL) The accompanying carrying case was a nice addition, but did serve to really make it easier to carry…this seems to only serve as a storage container for when not in use so you can differentiate it from other gear in your bag.
I did recall after using this that a DIY solution was suggested by Larry Becker, of NAPP notoriety (he does the weekly NAPP News segments and writes his own blog at Larry’s Cheap Shots), and think his belt clip idea is both innovative and and highly functional. If the folks at Hoodman made this accessory and slapped their brand on it, I’d be half inclined to purchase the entire kit from them directly.
It’s a fairly simple idea in total, and not much else to say other than – it works! The sturdy construction, and compact nature of it is perfect for any photographer who wants to utilize their LCD. For those of us with older cameras where shutter, aperture, ISO, and all other settings done via dials and the top viewer, it may not be as relevant, but for shooters using more recent gear like the Canon 50D, 60D, and 7D, the back screen is used much more to make these adjustments, so a device like the Hoodman Loupe could be a huge aid in making sure you’ve got your settings where you want them. For $80, you almost can’t go wrong! This is definitely the accessory you never thought you needed, but you really did!
Remember, this very Loupe is being given away at the end of the month, so for your chance to win this cool accessory, don’t forget to submit your BLOCK themed photo in the Flickr thread here. Good luck to those who enter, and thanks again to the folks at Hoodman for their sponsorship and contribution!
Product Review: Backlit Box
When the folks over at www.backlitbox.com approached me about reviewing the product and participating in the initial research and design of their new product, I was happy to oblige as new products that come into the marketplace are always engaging to participate in during development. So, I submitted one print for work-up, considering the line of products (images back-lit by laser lights). I chose a shot of the moon hanging beautifully over the harbor of South Carolina. When I got the product, I was skeptical at first because there was hardly any color to the image. However, when I plugged it in, the color became quite brilliant, and lit things amazingly well – better than I would have anticipated.
I did have some notes to go back to Faxon (the owner): the back of the box had no hanging wire mechanism, which put me in an awkward position of having to nail a picture hanger into the box myself, and without knowing how it was wired up for electrical, made for a potentially damaging situation. The other thing I noticed is that a thin line of light was evident around the perimeter of the box on all four sides. As we discussed at length later, this was an unfortunate side effect of the production line, with no real professional way to mask this light spill (we both agreed that gaffers tape or electrical tape would just look rather amateurish).
Not long after that, I had an idea when noticing a piece of trim molding in my office was peeling…what if there was a thin piece of trim molding that surrounded the print…this could effectively black out the border thereby avoiding the light spillage. I relayed the thoughts to Faxon, and shortly before I left for my trip, he informed me that the 2nd generation product was ready to ship and to send another photo in for production.
After sending in another image (a sunset over Folly Beach), I got the updated product literally 24 hours before my departure on vacation, and the end of the April contest series…so the review had to wait until now.
First off, let me say that I was (and am) very impressed with the professionalism that Faxon exhibited during the entire research and development process. Not only did he take constructive criticism well, but he also was quick to implement changes where improvements were desired, including not only a photo hanger on the back now, but also the trim molding to effectively eliminate the the white line of light around the border. Take a look:
The image looks amazing and I was surprised even that it was one from my own portfolio! Give the image quality, back-lit intensity, and visual appeal from this product, I must heartily give it a two-thumbs up rating, even though it is likely still in development. While most products usually are, this one even more so as he continues to improve upon the original design to deliver a better quality product to his client base. For the cost of printing, it almost is a no-brainer to consider these as part of your portfolio of products to offer clients. I’ve seen two different landscapes, and Faxon has shown me displays of portrait work and architecture work as well that have really rocked my socks off!
It’s a great product that will only improve with time, and is something every photographer should have both in their own portfolio, and as a product offering to their clients. For more information, and to upload/order your own images for production, please visit www.backlitbox.com
For those interested in having product reviews done on your own product line, please feel free to email me, as always. I do also appreciate the many requests for reviews of various products from the readership here, and all it takes is a request to me for a review to begin the process of communication with respective vendors for review copies, so keep chiming in with these ideas – it’s your suggestions that keep the product reviews coming, so sound off in the comments with what you’d like me to review next! Until then, happy shooting!
That Face!
Last week I wrapped things up with three tips for posing your subjects better, and boy did that launch a flurry of questions…so many that I think the next podcast will be dedicated to tips on posing your subjects. There’s so much to take into account, it really shouldn’t be that much of a surprise.
However, until then a few nuggets here and there will have to do. (I am trying to coordinate with friend-of-the-blog Kevin Mullins to have a go at a podcast and this would be a great subject for him as he’s an accomplished wedding, event, and photographer from across the pond. Kevin, I promise we’ll find a date here soon!)
So, the nuggets for this week are facial features – because at the heart of the portrait photographer is bringing out the beauty in your subjects’ face! Here’s a great set of tips for bringing out the best in your subjects! When shooting subjects it helps to keep in mind the three basic facial positions: full front, 3/4 pose, and profile positions:
For subjects with round or wide faces, it helps to raise the camera angle slightly so as to look down to them just a little bit. This elongates things a little more and minimizes the width perception. It also helps to approach them with a pose that has a 3/4 look rather than a full frontal look.
For subjects with a thin face, just the opposite holds true – have their full face looking toward you with the camera and try to keep the camera at eye level with your subject. Going up or down below their eye level will only serve to elongate a thin face even more.
For subjects with a large nose, it can often help to have them also face the camera directly. By doing this, their nose will point straight into the camera to help minimize its size, and lets viewers see the rest of their pretty face!
For subjects with a smaller nose, it’s time to shift back to the 3/4 look…this will bring more depth to their face and “enhance” things a little…
Other tips I’ve picked up that are not specifically related to facial positioning include things like:
- People Deep-Set Eyes – Point light into their eyes. Light coming too far from the sides will accentuate the depth.
- Glasses – Bounce the light off the ceiling where possible. If not, position the subject so that glasses are pointed away from the lights.
- Dark Hair – Make sure that the background provides enough contrast so hair doesn’t just blend into it. Hair lights or a light on the backdrop are extremely helpful. Also make sure the background doesn’t show through hair.
- Double Chin – A slightly higher camera angle will be more flattering than straight on. It also helps to have the subject leaning forward.
- Large ears – Use a ¾ face pose or a profile.
There you have it! Great ways to capture portraiture, specifically when working with facial angles. Special thanks go out to my good friend Evan Ashenhurst for sharing some of his portfolio for this article. You can see more of his work on his website at: Ashenhurst Photography
A final footnote – since I will undoubtedly get a few questions about which lenses are best to shoot portraiture with, my favorite is the nifty fifty actually. Amazingly sharp and the 1.8 depth of field is to be envied among all glass. If you’re in the market for a portrait lens, you’ll definitely want to check this bad boy out. Here’s the Canon-mount, a steal for less than $150 retail!
Hardware review: The Tether Table
A while ago I was thinking about what would be the best way to set up all the hardware for a studio scenario and blogging about it with the reading audience. The idea of the Tether Table came to me quickly and on approaching the folks at Tether Tools, it was met with equal enthusiasm. So, in short order, one was dispatched to me for review here on the blog – this will be the one given away in the upcoming end of month finale for the March Flickr Contest. So, without further ado, I give you:
The Aero-Master Tether Table
The Tether Table is a pretty straightforward device – it comes with the table itself, made out of T6 Aerospace Aluminum (whatever that is). Regardless of what the official name is – this table is pretty solid – I have no doubts as to whether it might bend under the weight of a laptop. What I found to be really nice is that it spins onto a tripod (sans head of course) quite nicely, and just as easily fits over the top of a light stand. The stability is also pretty equal between the two once it’s locked down.
So, how does the table lock down? There’s four little Allen screws that tie the female acceptor tube to the bottom of the table through the top. Their design makes them lay seamlessly flat so no worries about your laptop getting off kilter. Here’s a few sample shots to show you the design:
The other part that bears mentioning is the additonal kit item (not included normally with a Tether Table) is the Jerkstopper – a handy little device that attaches at both the laptop and camera end to avoid getting cables tugged out of your connection points. They really help to keep equipment from falling, plugs or connectors from getting ripped or damaged, and the add-on value is well worth the $22! Here’s the product shot from Tether Tools site to give you an idea…
The first problem I found was that it does require either a light stand or a tripod. So, if your camera normally goes on a tripod (mine does) and you have an external flash that goes on the light stand (mine does), then either the flash has to become more of a portable device (enter the wireless trigger system), or you need to get another light stand. I initially lucked out in that I am/was running the triggers through their paces for my good friend Kerry Garrison over at Blackbelt Lighting for an upcoming review this Friday, but the need for another light stand has become pretty clear to me. When I am using two-light setups though, things could get complicated, but that’s a personal gear issue, nothing really to do with the Tether Table itself, so no harm no foul there.
The second problem I found was budgetary. While the sturdy construction and clean polished look and feel are certainly features I can appreciate, being on a budget, the cost of entry to obtain a Tether Table of this caliber is a little pricey for my blood. At $179 for the Table and another $22 for the Jerkstopper kit, we’re over $200 and while it’s not inconceivable, it’s certainly rich for the enthusiast blood. For most professionals it is easily justified and likely something you can itemize in an invoice if needed. So, not completely out of reach, but up there for sure. Oh well, no one ever said photography was going to be cheap!
When all is said and done, I do think it’s a worthwhile investment. These can be invaluable in a studio or on-location shoot where you need to be moving around in between shots. The benefits of both the Tether Table and the companion Jerkstopper could be invaluable in a number of environments, including macro photography, food photography, portrait photography, and most product photography where a dedicated preview monitor would be super handy to have! To that end, I will be sad to see it go, but alas, the Contest Series gets priority! Thanks to the folks at Tether Tools for their generous contribution, and best of luck to all the participants! (If you haven’t entered your photo yet, the theme is FLAT, and the contest link is both here and at the top of the page!)
Have you got an idea for a product review? Is there something you’d like to see a test drive on? Sound off in the comments and I’ll try my darndest to make things happen! See you next time here on the blog. (And don’t forget the Facebook page where the “Behind-the-Scenes” video is posted on using this very table!…”Likes” and comments there are always appreciated too!).
Be sure about your ballhead…
A good tripod really consists of two components – the legs and the head. Without the legs, you get no stability, and without the head, there’s no way to mount a camera to the legs. With so many options out there not only in terms of vendors, but also in terms of head types and styles – there’s a lot to choose from. One of the most popular types of heads is the ball-head. I’ve owned just such a ballhead for a number of years now – the Manfrotto 488RC2.
Hardware Review: Sigma 70-200 f2.8
The kind folks at Sigma have become quite the regular contributor to the review section here – as you keep asking for lens reviews, the Sigma brand keeps coming up, and they continue to be generous with my participation in the loaner program. Thus far the lens line-up I’ve reviewed from the Sigma Collection include:
- Sigma 8-16mm
- Sigma 4.5mm Circular Fisheye
- Sigma 50mm f1.4
- Sigma 10-20mm
- Sigma 18-250mm
- Sigma 70mm Macro
Having compiled quite the list of review lenses, I am happy to announce the latest addition to this review series (some day I hope to have reviewed every lens Sigma has! 🙂 ) I give you the Sigma 70-200 f.28…
This lens is the comparable one to the Canon 70-200 f2.8, and while I’ve not had a chance to test the Canon equivalent, there are some optical similarities. I won’t go so far as to compare it to my own Canon 70-200 f4.0 simply because there are enough differences that it would be an apples to oranges comparison. So, here I’ll just share my own thoughts and shots on and from the lens for everyone to consider. Here is everything from soup to nuts:
The (Alphabet) Soup
This is the 70-200 F2.8 EX DG OS HSM lens – quite a mouthful, but all of these features are important. The EX signifies that this lens has benefitted from the now signature finish of Sigma lenses. It’s smooth but rugged, and hard to really explain, but denotes quality and professionalism while being also understated – it means business. I’ve raved about the finish that Sigma puts on their lenses and this one is no exception. Top Notch! The DG? That means it’s optimized for Digital use. To quote Sigma,
“These are large-aperture lenses with wide angles and short minimum focusing distances. With an abundance of peripheral illumination, they are ideal lenses for Digital SLR Cameras whilst retaining suitability for traditional 35mm SLRs.”
In other words, the f2.8 means the aperture is designed for the width and opening, optimizing the amount of light that comes in, and minimizing barrel distortion. The end result of all this means you spend less time in post fixing things. A definite plus in my book!
OS is the now easily recognizable label of optical stabilization. These lenses have built in mechanisms that counter your movement to allow for shooting at slower shutter speeds. Slower shutter speeds, wide open apertures all means you can shoot and get quality results in lower light! I’ll go into more details on their OS features later though.
HSM refers to the Hyper Sonic Motor, which means nearly whisper quiet movement as the lens picks up on the AF points. Less noise means less distraction. This is good regardless of whether you are shooting portraits, wildlife, or street photography. Remember, it’s not about the photographer, it’s about the photo, and the HSM is an added bonus to help achieve that end goal!
The Nuts
All the acronyms in the world won’t tell you a thing about lens performance though, and neither will my blathering about this or that, so let’s just get to the nuts. I went out with the lens to take some test shots and basically get a feel for the optical quality throughout the lens. I took some at short range (70mm), some in the middle (ranging from 120-150mm), and some at the long end (200mm). Shot groups also were mixed between simple test shots (a street) to portraits, and landscapes to get an idea of the focal range. Here’s said shots!
The 70mm shots
Mid-range Shots
Long Range Shots
Here, you can get an idea of both the optical quality and range of the optics as well as an idea of how it would perform in a variety of functions. I should also note that I have done literally no post production work in these at all. The only sharpening that was applied was on output sharpening from Lightroom, and that was set “For Screen” by default on all my images. In other words, nothing has been tweaked. Having said that, let’s take a look at some of the pros and cons of the optics overall.
Pros ~
I absolutely love the bokeh on this lens at long range. It compresses subjects nicely for portraiture, and throws the background nicely out of focus with some great treatment due to the optics. These shots were taken in afternoon light, and the sun was coming in and out of the scene – which could change the settings quickly. We were shooting on a monopod, and with IS on so the minor changes in shutter speed (these were aperture priority shots) didn’t really affect us. The f2.8 end came out nicely too, which was as expected though – that’s the whole reason for the f2.8 My excitement was primarily lent toward the bokeh at the long end which came out to about f4.5 Not too shabby!
I also was a huge fan of the OS – optical stabilization. It had two settings…OS 1 for shooting handheld, which counters both vertical and horizontal axis movement, and if you are shooting on a monopod (which is common with heavier glass), you can switch to OS 2, which turns off the one axis (horizontal I think). This allowed me to take some pretty decent shots at a hockey game a few weeks ago. You may recall seeing a gallery of those shots here on the blog. I was toggling between the OS1 and OS2 for that series so some shots did come out better than others – the ones with OS2 were the sharper in the set!
Another advantage here is that the collar for tripod or monopod mounting is included. I had to shell out an additional $50 for my Canon when I bought the f4, so seeing it included here was a happy surprise. I hate to go on and on here, but there was one other feature that bears mentioning and that is the smooth rotation I was getting from the lens as I worked it through the focal range. Either this was brand new, or had just been serviced because it was about the smoothest glass I’d seen from Sigma yet…and given the laundry list up top, that’s saying something!
And finally, the last big notch in favor of it, is – of course – the price. Coming it at $1700 this lens is certainly not cheap. However the savings is still there as it offers a s$200 over the Canon equivalent which comes in at at $1900! For the cost conscious (and who isn’t these days), that $200 can go toward many other accouterments in your shopping cart! And from what I can tell, the image quality is pretty darn good. (I got my prices from B&H Photo – the Sigma one is here and the Canon one is here)
Cons ~
This was much heavier and bigger than I anticipated. It was longer than my own 70-200 from Canon. Now I grant you my own is only an f4.0 and does not have the OS (or IS if you prefer – for the strict Canonistas out there). But I was a little surprised. I think that’s why my initial shots were a little oof – out of focus – because my arms just weren’t used to carrying the weight around. Lesson learned though – when moving into the fast glass category, at least shoot with a monopod, arm strain is greatly reduced!
The other big con was battery drain. All the time I could hear the OS kicking on and off as it would sense movement, even as I walked around. This caused some noticeable drain on my battery and I found myself swapping out after about 3 hours of shooting. Maybe this is typical of optically stabilized lenses and I am just not used to it, but the drain was something else that I had to take into account. I did have a spare with me, so it wasn’t that big a deal – but I certainly could not have shot all day on only two batteries with this lens.
While the collar was included, I don’t believe the lens hood is. Now the test unit I had did include a nice lens hood with the butterflies to avoid as much vignetting as possible, but that would likely add to the cost. Based on prices seen on B&H though, that’s only in the neighborhood of $25 (Direct link to Sigma marketplace here).
The Decision:
I would loved to have held onto this lens a while longer, and truth be told, will probably end up buying it. The Canon 70-200f4 may be working its last days in my bag, just because the faster glass and features are sure to see much more use from me. Coming up tomorrow, the results of the October contest giveaway – and announcing the November giveaway…make sure you stop in for that! Happy shooting and we’ll see you then!
3 Things to Beware Of…
A recent birthday launching me firmly into my fourth decade of existence yielded some nice returns…which has afforded me the opportunity to upgrade my monitor. I’ve been in desperate need of an upgrade to my setup as I have been working off a Dell 19″ and a Dell 17″ for my two display setup for a while now. Given the birthday broohaha, I had about $250 to go find something new. So, on a shopping spree I went, and I come back from said spree, with three new nuggets of information to share…or more to beware of when purchasing a new monitor.
#1 – Understand the data
I was out two weeks ago with this money (probably burning a hole in my pocket, and came across an HP monitor in none other than Best Buy. The price was right ($249), as were the dimensions (23″). I was looking at some of the other monitors, and none really filled the bill like this one did. The only downside was that there was no USB port (or so I thought). The salesman also pointed out the contrast ratio of 40,000:1! Without thinking about it to much, I figured it certainly wouldn’t be a bad monitor – so why not give it a whirl! After all, a 30 day return policy to the brick-and-mortar worked in my favor. So, home it came for setup. A few landmines awaited:
Size – While the dimensions of the monitor are always important, another consideration to take into account is the elevation or lift you get. My old faithful Dell had a telescoping arm that elevated it nicely over my Drobo, and kept it right at eye level for me (or very near it to prevent me from hunching over too much and becoming Lurch!. The HP 2310m had no such benefit and I then found myself shopping around for monitor stands. Subtract another $40 for a decent quality stand (Allsop).
USB Ports – I neglected to consider that the HP had no USB ports. I previously had 3 things coming off the old monitor – a printer, my mouse, and a dangler I could connect my card reader to easily. So, some rewiring was in order. But, this helped me clean up some cable management issues, so that’s not necessarily a bad thing.
Contrast Ratio – If you take away nothing else from this post, consider this: contrast ratios are meaningless! That’s right, they are meaningless numbers, generated by each vendor to measure their own “belief” of what the expected performance could be of the monitor under the most extreme settings. I got a hard knock here, recalling after some collaboration with the crew over in the NAPP forums (thanks to Andrew Rodney for the reminder). As it turns out, pretty much anything past 1000:1 is meaningless under a calibrated workspace, because monitors just aren’t made to produce a useful contrast past this once calibrated. Some of the really price ones from LaCie and Eizo do, but those are in the thousands of dollars range. So, keeping true to my budget, I had to settle for consumer grade gear. But, I wish I would have known that before buying, because the decision was made in haste and on bad information. So, lesson learned – know the important data! Contrast Ratio = 1000:1 or greater is fine!
#2 – Don’t Be Afraid to Settle
After finding out all these little caveats, I also got an email blast from Newegg, touting their Halloween deals, and of course, a monitor came up in the laundry list. An ASUS 25″ for $230! I was floored. Two more inches of real estate, for $30 less! So, I started digging into the reviews, forums, and consumer reports. I’d purchased a few of their motherboards over the years and was happy with those. A trip back to the NAPP forums did alert me to a few misgivings some had about the brand though, so I decided against returning the HP in exchange for the ASUS. After all, it was only $30 difference in price, and would have possibly got me in a situation where I may not have been able to return the ASUS without getting an ugly restocking fee. And besides, the low profile and lack of USB were also present there, so there wasn’t much to gain. Then I saw the LG.
It was on display at Sam’s Club, and I’d seen these things in use in lots of retail settings, including warehouse environments, retail, and even doctor offices. The seemed to be of decent enough quality, although the contrast was always way over cranked. I could fix that with a calibration though, so checked the price: $189! A savings of $60 (figure in tax). That would negate the $40 spent on the monitor stand and give me a little change back in the wallet. Off to the web I went for more research. Turns out this isn’t that bad a monitor. I decided to go for the savings and returned the HP, bringing the LG home. Now, all that was left was to set it up, and I was off to the races!
#3 – Calibrate it!
Last but not least, I set the LG up to calibrate. After twenty minutes trying to dial in the color, contrast, and brightness, I was beginning to understand the differences between vendor makes and accuracy. I’d heard of monitors that just wouldn’t calibrate and was suspecting that this was the case for the LG. (The luminance was just way to low, and the colors would never fully align to center in my Gretag Macbeth colorimeter. I finally gave up, and went to take the colorimeter off. On doing so, I noticed that the ambient light filter was still on the puck that I had used to measure ambient light. That explained it! Sans filter, I placed the colorimeter back on the monitor, and within 5 minutes, had things dialed in pretty close to perfect. My luminance is 0.5 off, the color is at 6500, and contrast is spot on dead center. It’s got 30 days to satisfy me (and assuming nothing else goes on sale…) So, word to the wise – when calibrating your monitor, remove the ambient light filter – it can save a lot of headache!
I’ve now moved the 19″ into the secondary position, the 23″ has become the primary, and the added benefit of the monitor stand has given me two new rows of surface area to store things like my thumb drives, media cards, businesss cards, and other bric-a-brac. More storage in an increasingly cluttered life is a good thing!
So, watch that contrast, check to calibrate, and exercise caution in spending habits – especially if you can’t return things easily.
Now it’s your turn – got any purchasing stories or tales to share where you learned something in the experience? Sound off in the comments, let me know your thoughts on the above, or to share your own “war stories”. Thanks for stopping in and we’ll be back tomorrow with more photo goodness.
P.S. Another heads up reminder, that the November Newsletter will be coming out this Friday, so if you’ve not signed up – make sure you pick up a subscription for it either in the sidebar or here. It’s free, and only available to subscribers!