[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Loon Zone Chat Page Version 1.60 ] [ FAQ ]
Posted by Ballpark Frank (69.178.8.75) on 10:41:29 08/10/15
In Reply to: Take a look... posted by 46er
Ralph,
That's not the Sigma I remember from the 1980s and 1990s, when folks who either could not or would not pay the big bucks for the top flight lenses, would economize with Sigma options.
I read the entire document, and realized that employing one of these spiffy high-end, high-powered zooms definitely requires the same sort of accessory commitment as using a 400, 500, or 600 mm telephoto. When I was shooting my big telephotos in the 1990s and early 2000s, I had a Wimberley head and a big heavy Bogen tripod. I had custom cases made for the lenses, with heavy duty carry straps, so I could sling them over a shoulder while hiking. I once carted my 500/f4 4 miles one-way to an area just below 13,000 feet elevation, in hopes of shooting the bighorn ram herd that frequently hung out there. Naturally, that particular day, they were nowhere to be found!
The thought of travel from 11 to 19 inches with that weight is intimidating, particularly if one didn't have the extended foot.
I suspect I might find myself getting back into the commitment of shooting "big" one of these days, knowing it would have to be along or in close proximity to the roadside. (Here in Alaska, there is so much public land traversed by crude ATV trails, I bet there are plenty of folks who haul the big lenses and supporting hardware via ATV is summer and snowmobile in winter to access various opportunities.)
It will be interesting to watch the market over the next several years to see how Canon, Nikon, and Tamron respond to Sigma's competitive threat. Hopefully, the customers will be the ultimate beneficiaries.
Ballpark
[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Loon Zone Chat Page Version 1.60 ] [ FAQ ]