Monday, June 30, 2008

Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8

Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 is my main lens when shooting sports. It is a handy reach for a gym (Roller Darby) or a dirtjump/BMX track. Aperture of f/2.8 means that shooting at ISO800 in a badly-lit gym will often enough give me acceptably short times to freeze action with shutter speed and/or use flashes at lower power (so they recycle quicker).

The focal range of 50-150mm on a Nikon DX camera is the same as a 75-225mm on a full-frame (35mm), which is pretty much the standard sports telephoto range all the way from film times - but with this lens it comes in a surprisingly compact package! The price you pay for weight savings is that the lens is DX-only (Sigma call it DC). The HSM version auto-focuses even on Nikon D40/x/60 cameras.

When buying this lens I was replacing the Nikon AF-S 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 VR which I was disappointed with for a number of reasons. You get what you pay for with that lens, at least in build and physical construction. I dunno why I was expecting a pro lens at a hundred'n'fiddy squid. Aperture of 5.6 is useless for trying to freeze fast moving people with low shutter speed (VR or no-VR has no effect on that). I needed something with a tough build and f/2.8 or faster.

Looking at the options that I could afford and was willing to carry around, I chose this Sigma lens above the more expensive and heavier options. I played with the idea of one of the AF-S 70/80-200mm f/2.8 Nikons or Sigma's version of the same range. I haven't regretted this choice since I got the lens about 6 months ago.

Nothing external moves on this lens - it has internal focusing and zoom. The whole thing feels very solid; lot of the exterior seems to be metal - the two rings each have their own rubber pattern and turn very smoothly. The lens is not sealed against weather, but it does have a lot fewer "entry points" for dirt/moisture than other lenses in this price range. It is also affordable compared to (supposedly much better, but much larger/heavier) Nikon f/2.8 glass which costs 2-3 times as much.

The only thing I mind is no optical stabilization. It would have been useful in a telephoto lens combined with f/2.8 aperture. Focusing from 1m is OK but not great.

I also feel a lot of wrist strain (biking injuries catch up) when using a telephoto with the D40's small grip - although that's something that would be even more of an issue with the Nikon AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR that I was thinking of as my first choice until I found this sturdy little thing at 50% of what I was about to spend.

There are some reviews at:
Pop Photo, ePhoto Zine,
and a Flickr Group

No comments: