On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 14:42:50 EST, you wrote: >Been eyeing used Sigma 170-500mm APOs. For wildlife, not sports, though a bit >slow for wildlife. > >They come with tripod mounts. How does this work, BTW? I haven't bought a >tripod yet, so wondering. > >You mount the lens directly on the tripod, not the camera? Is anything else, >part-wise, needed? Like a tripod addition or something? Is there something one >should look for in a tripod if one is going to do a fair amount lens mounting? > >Discovered I have still quite a few newbie questions still in me. > >TIA, Marnie aka Doe ;-)
For an intro lens for wildlife, get the Sigma AF 400/5.6 APO Macro, the one that focuses close enough for 1:3 Macro. Or its cousin, the Sigma AF 300/4 APO Macro, which also focuses close. They both have nice rotating tripod collars. They are much sharper and somewhat faster than the newer 170-500 and 50-500 zooms, and since both lenses are discontinued they can even be found new for decent prices. Plus they are good enough optically to shoot wide open or with teleconverter. These lenses will not need to be replaced with "something sharper" because they are both keepers. The close-focusing capability of these two Sigma APO Macro lenses is *much* more useful than the zoom function of the 170-500. It is about perfect for butterflies and other larger bugs. I had the 400/5.6 APO Macro, and except for the fact that it did not register correct aperture with a Super Program, it was a first rate lens in every respect. As for focal length, there's not really much difference between 400mm and 500mm in the field. I understand about the need to keep costs down. However, when it comes to long lenses, the least expensive alternative is to get a good, sharp lens the first time out. -- John Mustarde www.photolin.com
