American Bison ( Buffalo ) Sigma 50-500

Got a thin skin? Then look elsewhere. Post a link to an image that you've made, and invite others to offer their critiques. Honesty is encouraged, but please be positive in your constructive criticism. Flaming and just plain nastiness will not be tolerated. Please note that this is not an area for you to showcase your images, nor is this a place for you to show-off where you have been. This is an area for you to post images so that you may share with us a technique that you have mastered, or are trying to master. Typically, no more than about four images should be posted in any one post or thread, and the maximum size of any side of any image should not exceed 950 px.

Moderators: Greg B, Nnnnsic, Geoff, Glen, gstark, Moderators

Forum rules
Please note that image critiquing is a matter of give and take: if you post images for critique, and you then expect to receive criticism, then it is also reasonable, fair and appropriate that, in return, you post your critique of the images of other members here as a matter of courtesy. So please do offer your critique of the images of others; your opinion is important, and will help everyone here enjoy their visit to far greater extent.

Also please note that, unless you state something to the contrary, other members might attempt to repost your image with their own post processing applied. We see this as an acceptable form of critique, but should you prefer that others not modify your work, this is perfectly ok, and you should state this, either within your post, or within your signature.

Images posted here should conform with the general forum guidelines. Image sizes should not exceed 950 pixels along the largest side (height or width) and typically no more than four images per post or thread.

Please also ensure that you have a meaningful location included in your profile. Please refer to the FAQ for details of what "meaningful" is.

American Bison ( Buffalo ) Sigma 50-500

Postby KerryPierce on Sat Apr 16, 2005 11:04 am

Nikon D70 ,Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF
1/320s f/8.0 at 500.0mm ISO 400 hand held

Image
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
User avatar
KerryPierce
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1233
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Detroit, MI

Postby PiroStitch on Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:13 pm

Nice and sharp :) Love the shaggy fur
User avatar
PiroStitch
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4669
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 1:08 am
Location: Hong Kong

Postby beltbuckle on Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:17 pm

Nice and sharp Kerry, that beast has some hair. How do you like the Sigma 50-500? It is a lens I am seriously thinking about as the successor to my 70-300 when I can save up the funds. Looks pretty sharp at 500mm!
User avatar
beltbuckle
Newbie
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2005 4:41 am
Location: Boise, Idaho, USA

Postby sirhc55 on Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:39 pm

Nice pic Kerry but I wonder why you did not use a 50mm lens :lol:
Chris
--------------------------------
I started my life with nothing and I’ve still got most of it left
User avatar
sirhc55
Key Member
 
Posts: 12930
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:57 pm
Location: Port Macquarie - Olympus EM-10

Postby KerryPierce on Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:40 pm

PiroStitch wrote:Nice and sharp :) Love the shaggy fur


Thanks, Piro. :)
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
User avatar
KerryPierce
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1233
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Detroit, MI

Postby KerryPierce on Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:48 pm

beltbuckle wrote:Nice and sharp Kerry, that beast has some hair. How do you like the Sigma 50-500? It is a lens I am seriously thinking about as the successor to my 70-300 when I can save up the funds. Looks pretty sharp at 500mm!


If you're willing to use at least a monopod in good light and tripod in lesser lighting, the lens will make you happy. If you're more inclined to hand held shots, like I am, I'd suggest that one of the 80-400 lenses would prolly be a better solution.

The Bigma seems to be a great lens, but I can't shoot hand held shots all day with it, like I can the 80-400vr, and get acceptable sharpness. On a tripod with a good head, either lens is simply amazing to me. :shock:

I'd be willing to bet that you'd be happier with your 70-300 if you used a monopod at least at focal lengths above 150mm. :) My current love is the Feisol monopod with a Manfrotto 3232 tilt head.
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
User avatar
KerryPierce
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1233
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Detroit, MI

Postby KerryPierce on Sat Apr 16, 2005 1:51 pm

sirhc55 wrote:Nice pic Kerry but I wonder why you did not use a 50mm lens :lol:


But, I did! :!: I started at 50 and zoomed to 500..... 8) :twisted:
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
User avatar
KerryPierce
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1233
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Detroit, MI

Postby Gordon on Sat Apr 16, 2005 2:20 pm

Nice pic Kerry, when I was in Yellowstone NP in 99 I had a rather scary close encounter with a bison, it walked up to me when I was standing on a wooden walkway (you have to use them to avoid falling through the thin crust and get boiled alive!)
My FE2 was in my backpack, trying to keep the frost off it, there was a monster bison sniffing me from about 1 arms length, and I decided standing very still was the safest thing to do, so as to make the bull bison think I wasnt a threat to his herd of females and calves, despite really wanting to get my camera out!
24mm would have been perfect ;)

Gordon
User avatar
Gordon
Member
 
Posts: 436
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 11:04 pm
Location: Loomberah/Siding Spring Observatory

Postby KerryPierce on Sat Apr 16, 2005 3:06 pm

Gordon wrote:Nice pic Kerry, when I was in Yellowstone NP in 99 I had a rather scary close encounter with a bison, it walked up to me when I was standing on a wooden walkway (you have to use them to avoid falling through the thin crust and get boiled alive!)
My FE2 was in my backpack, trying to keep the frost off it, there was a monster bison sniffing me from about 1 arms length, and I decided standing very still was the safest thing to do, so as to make the bull bison think I wasnt a threat to his herd of females and calves, despite really wanting to get my camera out!
24mm would have been perfect ;)

Gordon


woof! :shock: That's just a little too close, Gordon. You'd have gotten feature distortion from the WA at that distance and extreme redeye from the flash and probably your lens would have fogged from the critter's bad breath. The shot prolly would have been ruined. :(

But, I'll bet that you don't leave the camera in the backpack all the time now. :D
my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/
User avatar
KerryPierce
Senior Member
 
Posts: 1233
Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:20 pm
Location: Detroit, MI


Return to Image Reviews and Critiques