Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only

170-500mm or 17-35mm, hmmm…

Homepage Forums Gear & Links Photography Equipment Lenses 170-500mm or 17-35mm, hmmm…

  • This topic is empty.

170-500mm or 17-35mm, hmmm…

  • Alan Rossiter
    Participant

    Well gentle folks I’m in need of assistance on a critical matter. My better half (the paymaster general) has countersigned a cheque of around ?600 for me to blow :D . But I’m in a quandry. I like landscapes for their breathtaking abilities as an image but I also want to get up close & personal with animals…without the use of a hide (and loose that thought!)

    Down in lil’ ol Wexford the North Slob is a nature photographers paradise but the geese don’t play ball – the cunning little beggers won’t come close to a hide. Smaller, more domesticated feathered friends do come close so it is possible to fill a frame with a big feck-off lens on the end of my Sony A100. But as you can see ?600 won’t cover both bases so I’m looking for your advice. Is it the smaller, faster, unassuming landscape accommodating type 17-35mm lens or the big “I’m a photographer, move over” type Sigma 170-500mm 4.5-5.6 APO blah-de-blah addition from Ebay.

    Any advice would be welcome. I just want someone to make up my mind, my wires aren’t connecting right. :?

    PS – I have a 2x converter, a 70-210mm Minolta 4.5-5.6, kit 18-70mm 4.5 – 5.6, a 0.42x wide angle add-on & in a moment of weakness I succomed to a mirror 500mm f8 cheapy. It’s a start but now I want quality. :wink:

    joe_elway
    Participant

    I had a 170-500. I only kept it for a few months. I wasn’t happy with it at all. Way too slow for me. I’d recommend saving a bit more to get something a bit better. I say this because trying to save a little on what you think will be an OK lens is a false economy … like buying cheap tripod.

    The Sigma 50-500 has a much better rep than the 170-500. It’s still a slow lens but the glass is much better than the 170-500. Unfortunately, this is pricey. Check out the Hong Kong ebay sites. I’m assuming this lens is available for you .. haven’t checked.

    And if you’re going 300mm+ then you will need a solid tripod. The length and weight of the lens really makes cheaper legs wobble and ruins your shots.

    EDIT: Just realised you’re a Sony user.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.