Photoclubalpha

Well, I am finally able to afford another telephoto. I am torn between the following:
Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 HSM
Sigma 50-500mm (does this have HSM now or what?)
Sigma 150-500mm HSM

My questions are:
1. I like taking pictures at the zoo, but occasional fast moving objects as well. Is the 50-500mm without HSM and without 2.8 going to kill me with moving subjects?
2. Does the 50-500mm have HSM now or not? Too many conflicting reports online and now I'm confused. If you have one WITH HSM, can you post a pic of your lens to prove that it exists?

Thanks in advance!

My answers are:
1. For fast moving objects, or anything not particularly motionless, you'll miss the faster apertures of f/2.8 and f/4, or else you'll only take the lens out in bright daylight. Using slower shutter speeds or higher ISO settings won't make the lens unusable, but the lens will be much slower to focus. I am used to the 70-210/4, my slowest lens, and recently tried a Minolta 100-300/4.5-5.6 APO. I found it exasperatingly slow to focus, often hunting indefinitely in less-than-optimal light.

A lens you may also consider is Sigma's 100-300/4, which is less expensive than the Bigma and faster, but still longer than the 70-200. Pro rental outfits Alpha Lens Rental and LensRentals.com offer both the 50-500 "Bigma" and the 100-300/4, but neither currently offer Sigma's 70-200/2.8.

2. Sigm's 50-500 DG does not use HSM focusing in Sony mount. It wasn't until fairly recently that Sigma discovered Sony used a compatible focusing system, so most newly introduced Sigma lenses will have HSM in Sony mount. Not the Bigma, however.

See Sigma's page on the APO 50-500mm F4-6.3 EX DG HSM:
http://www.sigmaphoto.com/lenses/lenses ... avigator=3

www.SigmaPhoto.com wrote:HSM (Hyper Sonic Motor)
The HSM models (the HSM is only available for AF Canon, Nikon, Four Thirds and Sigma Mounts) provide quiet high-speed AF function, as well as full time manual focus capability.

I have been through the same dilemma, forget about the Sigma and go for the Sony 70400G. The lens is fantastic.

Buying a Sigma is not a bad idea, but you will always wonder waht if?

What if I waited a bit and bought the sharper lens.

Something to ponder about!

Good luck, and keep on shooting!

Well I went ahead and ordered the 70-200mm 2.8. I used to have the 70-200mm BEFORE the HSM. I loved it then and I'm sure it's even better now.

Free shipping and a digital picture frame, plus I had a $50 gift card. Not too bad of a deal .

I'm in a similar spot. Down to the Sigma 70-200 2.8 or the Sony 70-200 2.8 G. Do I part with the extra $1000 US? I think I know the answer, but waiting to pull the trigger.........

That extra $1k could take you a long way toward other gear...a few more bucks and you've got a bigma, or a 35/1.4, or any number of neat optics, the independent purchase of which you might sweat more than your decision between the Sigma and Alpha 70-200/2.8s.

That is to say, I wish that was my toughest decision!

Trigger pulled. The sigma is headed my way. Given the dificulty I had finding it (sold out at B&H, Androma, and lots of other online retailers), lots of others made the same decision. Paid $749 at Abes of Maine (one of the few places that had it in stock). Now to find a good price on some used 1.4 and 2.0 converters....

if that's the HSM II that you've bought you need to get the HSM compatible Sigma TCs (not as easy as it sounds as they are a recent arrival for MAF/Alpha) otherwise HSM won't work properly with the older or non-Sigma versions fitted.
there are several threads on Dyxum about this.