Nick - I think You made a good choice, especially for the money You paid. Once You close the lens to f8 You gonna have really nice results and if You set Your ISO to 1600, You can even get some nice photos handholding. AFAIR the main difference between the DG and non DG version is additional coating, but it shouldn't be a big problem for You anyway. If You still fell confused, I 'll tell You that I got bigma (with the DG) 2 months ago, and paid $900 for it.

Just got a d300s and the 70-300 vr for Xmas... Now just gotta get a wide angle zoom and a new tripod/ monopod and we will be set! Course that stuff will be after the new snowblower I am gonna get to deal with all tbs snow we keep getting this winter!

Did I make a mistake? I didn't respond to this thread when I first saw it; yesterday afternoon. The reason was that I knew I was going to meet a guy this morning and check out his Sigma Bigma. I wound up buying it for $620 cash. The one down side to it was that it is NOT the curent DG version. It is the previous, D, version. He had gotten it from the original owner, and he didn't know how old it was. I thought the original had come out in about 2001. He did say that he has had previous experience with a "D" version compared to a newer "DG" version and found very little difference. In the case of the Bigma, he thinks that the only difference is in the close focusing distance, just a few feet he thinks.

My lens is extremely clean and it came with a Tiffen UV filter, also very clean and scratch free. It also had the Sigma carrying case and the small lens manual. He said if I didn't like it, I could return it with in a week and he would give me a refund. With that kind of an offer, I felt he was extremely considerate and reputable, so I bought it. He was carrying a new 8 month old little girl so he has had recent need for more money than photo equipment, so he was thinning his photo gear out.

Did I make a mistake buying this lens? I will be using it on my new D90 that I got around Christmas. I also got the very cheap Tamron 70-300mm lens for Christmas. It works good enough for me at this point and only cost me $165 new from Amazon.

I tried using the Bigma hand held and couldn't really do it justice, but I had taken a monopod with me and used that. I also shot the same image using my 18-200mm Nikon VR lens at 200 mm and compared that image with from the Bigma at 200mm. It seemed like the Nikon image was a tad bit sharper, but I'm not an expert at judging. and, I am sure that I will be using a real tripod with this lens, mostly. The monopod really does help, however.

So, a mistake? big one, small one, not a mistake at all????
Thanks for any advice,
Nick V

The last thing I bought was the Gitzo GT5541LS carbon tripod.

adamz said:
how much did You pay for Your bigma - I got mine 2 months ago for $900 incl.shipping from UK. I agree with You that most of the reviews are done by ppl with poor long lens technique, but the lens is great in it's price range (cheapest nikon with 500mm gonna cos You almost 10x more). as for my experience so far with this sigma I found it much better than 70-300vr on the long end once it's stopped down to f8. To be honest, the only one thing that annoys me about this lens is the fact that I need to close it down to f8 in order to get good (as for IQ) pictures.

I got mine for 600 USD used from a reputable dealer. Also came with a good UV filter, which at 86mm filter size is very relevant. It is pristine except that the tripod collar seems to be glued so that it can't rotate even when you loosen it and a bit of paint is coming off of the tripod foot. I mean, the filter has less dust on it than my 4 month old 70-300mm VR, same for the front element, even though the lens was purchased in 2003. I really don't know why it was so cheap, the place I bought it from doesn't generally have THAT good prices. It was recently serviced (might explain why it looks so clean, actually) when the previous owner had it get ripped off of his camera when he wore his camera's strap rather than the lens's strap. Apparently the "rear barrel" was broken, and it destroyed his camera on the way off, too. I will not be making that mistake after hearing the story.

Mine was the 70-200 2.8 VRII :^)

bernard said:
By accident, I noticed that the 5 Mpix camera included in my new cell phone (Nokia 6700) is not bad, especially in bright sun shine. That was a happy surprise (But forget the LED flash which is a joke).

Maybe your expectations are too high. :D

warprints said:
Looks like I'll have to buy something new and pretty to hang with the big kids. My last purchase was just a polarizer for my 35mm 1.8G.

Yeah, I haven't bought much, but I actually have a lot of manuals to read now. The Canon Elan manual I found is actually split between 3 PDF files. Fun...

how much did You pay for Your bigma - I got mine 2 months ago for $900 incl.shipping from UK. I agree with You that most of the reviews are done by ppl with poor long lens technique, but the lens is great in it's price range (cheapest nikon with 500mm gonna cos You almost 10x more). as for my experience so far with this sigma I found it much better than 70-300vr on the long end once it's stopped down to f8. To be honest, the only one thing that annoys me about this lens is the fact that I need to close it down to f8 in order to get good (as for IQ) pictures.

I found a good deal on a Bigma (Sigma 50-500mm) at a local shop over winter break. After some tests, I've found that it makes images easily comparable to Nikon's 70-300mm VR, comparing both lenses at their max. focal length, so I guess I got a good copy (I'm certainly happy with it). I've also found that pretty much all of the reviews I've read on this lens were written by people who don't know how to use really long lenses. All of their images seem to exhibit camera shake, so they don't think it's any good at the long end. I'll post a real review of it here if I have the time (I probably won't). Suffice to say, you shouldn't hesitate to buy this lens if you can't afford Nikon's Primes and you can get it from a place with a good return policy. I say that not just because of Sigma's reputation for poor quality control, but also because this lens is big and heavy and probably not for everyone.

Last major thing I got was a Sekonic L-758DR lightmeter.

I feel you, warprints, this was my first camera purchase since my ETRS kit a few months back.

Looks like I'll have to buy something new and pretty to hang with the big kids. My last purchase was just a polarizer for my 35mm 1.8G.

By accident, I noticed that the 5 Mpix camera included in my new cell phone (Nokia 6700) is not bad, especially in bright sun shine. That was a happy surprise (But forget the LED flash which is a joke).

I got the Gitzo 5561SGT "Giant" Tripod.
that would complete my collection.
Currently my RRS BH-55 Head is on my GT3541LS and my Wimberley on my GT5541LS.
Im not sure wether im going to replace the GT5541LS with the SGT yet, but now i can test it.
If not ill proberly keep it for when i need that hight.

Most recent purchase, MB-D10 for my D300. Should make vertical shooting with my 300mm F4 AF-S a lot easier!

I got my 500/8 used many years ago. Ai - made around 1984-85. It's wonderfully small and light (840 grams). The focus on mine is very loose, but I paid little for it. A fixed aperture lens does have real limits, but nothing else I've ever seen can match it for size, weight and image quality. It's almost a macro lens in that it goes to 1:2.5.

One of the big benefits for me in getting a D300s is the ability to meter with this and some of my other older lenses. The one shortcoming of my D90 is I have to go manual, chimping or use another meter.

My big new thing I got is a Calumet 4x5 rail studio view camera with a 150mm Nikkor lens.

A Canon Elan SLR and a Mamiya DSX 1000 SLR.

Are there different versions of that mirror 500, ted? I've actually wanted one of those for a while.

of recent, a 24 2.8, 35-70 2.8, and Domke F-3X (all used). . .new, a 60mm 2.8, Kata 467, and GAVE away the 85 3.5 VR (sigh, but my mom loves it, so it's all good!)

Gosh Jonny, a QR plate? Same here. I saw a discussion of the old Spiratone 400/6.3 and pulled my old lens out. Then I got out the old 500/8 reflex. Then I got a Kirk plate (LP-4) for them. I bought it locally for a lot more than $20, but I'd forgotten how much fun the old 500 was, especially with it's close focusing ability.

jonnyapple said:
Yeah, welcome rockness. So, I missed it. Did you consider this an upgrade or a downgrade? You did lose VR, after all. I'll trade you for my QR plate. ;-)

Thanks, I still have the 18-105, but this is really a great upgrade for me, it´s a dream-combination...

alphanikonrex said:
Welcome to the forum Rockness! Nice upgrade you had there :^D

Thanks, I think it´s a nice upgrade too, i´m going for the next FX later this year i hope...

Rockness said:
My recent purchase

NIKKOR AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and a NIKKOR AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED

I had the 18-105 DX before...

Yeah, welcome rockness. So, I missed it. Did you consider this an upgrade or a downgrade? You did lose VR, after all. I'll trade you for my QR plate. ;-)

Rockness said:
My recent purchase

NIKKOR AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8G ED and a NIKKOR AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8G ED

I had the 18-105 DX before...

Welcome to the forum Rockness! Nice upgrade you had there :^D