Sigma 135-400mm APO DG AF versus BIGMA?

rdrum76 · 06-05-2007, 08:04 PM

$400 & 100mm is the difference bwt these bears.

Which one is the better lens if $ & focal length were not an issue?

Thanks to all!

**Mallee Boy** · 06-05-2007, 08:11 PM

Hi Rdrum,
Have the 135-400 and like it a lot, know nothing about the Bigma other than it gets good reports from owners as well.
Neither lens is a fast monster, but if you allow for that the 135-400 goes pretty well.
What is your primary use for it?
Grant

little laker · 06-05-2007, 08:37 PM

I also have a 135-400, and love it. I hardly ever touch any of my other telescopic's now.

I've never tried a Bigma, although I might get a quick chance to in the next 2 weeks... my camera guy just ordered one and occasionally lets me demo a lens

If your dealing with a local camera store why not see if they'll let you try them both as well.

rdrum76 · 06-06-2007, 03:30 AM

I would like to use the lens for wildlife in Rocky Mountain National Park.

Mostly bigger animals; I figure that it might be limited for birding.

With the extra $$ I would like to invest in the new Pentax 100mm Macro.

How you tried the 135-400 with a teleconvertor, if so what results?

Thanks for your help!

Last edited by rdrum76; 06-06-2007 at 03:31 AM. Reason: spelling

jeda · 06-06-2007, 03:53 AM

The Sigma 135-400 won't work with a teleconvertor because you won't have enough light. No more AF and problems with white balance.

On the other hand, the lens is a nice one but I seem to use the lens mostly at the 400mm edge.
This means I actually would not need a zoom but more a fixed lens and perhaps would a 500m do better.

The lens is usefull for birding but then again, a fixed lens would be better for me since I allways use it at 400mm.

ist DL | K10D | Sigma 135-400 F4.5-5.6 | Sigma 17-70, F2.8-4.5 | Pentax SMC 50-200

KennJ · 06-06-2007, 12:00 PM

For wildlife you will come to wish for the extra 100mm as soon as you start shooting most likely and if you go after birds you will really want that extra 100m.
There is a 180-500mm made by Sigma that might be more in line if you do not want to deal with the short end of the Bigma.
Kenn

little laker · 06-06-2007, 12:53 PM

I use mine as often at 135mm as I do at 400mm, and often partly in between.

I even use it for some macro work. You can focus as close as 2 meters away

I've got a 500mm prime that I basically retired the moment that I got this lens. And I haven't missed the extra length at all.
Even while shooting wildlife, although I seem to be able to get closer to the animals than most people that I know.

I sure wish that I had a dedicated macro lens, so you know what route I'd take if I was in your shoes

713alan · 06-06-2007, 03:18 PM

How does the lens length compare when fully extended?

rfortson · 06-06-2007, 08:53 PM

I had the 135-400 for a short while, but sold it and bought the Bigma. The lack of a zoom lock bugged me on the 135-400, and the shots didn't seem to have quite as much contrast, but I also used the lens during the middle of winter when it was pretty dull around here anyway.

The Bigma is a great lens in my book. I like superzooms as I generally use the shorter end of the range as well. I took some "macro" shots of wild flowers with the Bigma that I really like. I also like the bokeh of the Bigma. The 135-400 is a good lens for the money, though.

I noticed that the Bigma (on a Canon Rebel XT) won the grand prize shot in some Outdoor Photographer magazine contest. It was a beautiful shot taken here in Texas at High Island, and was a very worthy winner. The Bigma (in the right hands...not mine) can take some wonderful shots. The 135-400 can probably do almost as well in the same hands, though.

I guess I haven't really added to the decision making process here.

I just know I'm glad I've got the Bigma and haven't really missed the 135-400.

**Lowell Goudge** · 06-07-2007, 08:53 AM

I think you'll find both these lenses are something that you typically use at the maximum focal length only.

I have not tried either, but use my SMC300 F4.0 with both the pentax 1.7x autofocus TC, and with a 2x TC in manual focus.

It is a little slow, but I don't have the $ for a really fast long lens. For Birding, I generally use a flash for extra light.

I think you will find that for birding you will really want something longer and when I am serious I put on a celestron C90 (1000mm F10)

If you limit to 500 mm you can hand hold it, just you don't have the light to really let you do that.

06-05-2007, 08:04 PM	#1
rdrum76 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 221	Sigma 135-400mm APO DG AF versus BIGMA? $400 & 100mm is the difference bwt these bears. Which one is the better lens if $ & focal length were not an issue? Thanks to all!

06-06-2007, 03:30 AM	#4
rdrum76 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 221 Original Poster	Need a lens for Rocky Mountain National Park I would like to use the lens for wildlife in Rocky Mountain National Park. Mostly bigger animals; I figure that it might be limited for birding. With the extra $$ I would like to invest in the new Pentax 100mm Macro. How you tried the 135-400 with a teleconvertor, if so what results? Thanks for your help! Last edited by rdrum76; 06-06-2007 at 03:31 AM. Reason: spelling

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Sigma 135-400mm f4.5-5.6 APO	sutha	Sold Items	5	05-06-2009 01:54 PM
LBA: Sigma APO DG 135-400mm	maxwell1295	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	3	04-18-2009 06:12 AM
SIGMA 135-400mm f4.5-5.6 APO	calicojack	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	02-27-2009 11:26 AM
For Sale - Sold: FS: SIGMA 135-400mm F4-5.6 APO DG [B]	rdrum76	Sold Items	2	10-09-2007 08:26 AM
Sigma APO 135-400mm F4.5-5.6 DG	Tyler	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	07-14-2007 03:47 PM

06-05-2007, 08:11 PM	#2
Mallee Boy Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,904	Hi Rdrum, Have the 135-400 and like it a lot, know nothing about the Bigma other than it gets good reports from owners as well. Neither lens is a fast monster, but if you allow for that the 135-400 goes pretty well. What is your primary use for it? Grant

06-05-2007, 08:37 PM	#3
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	I also have a 135-400, and love it. I hardly ever touch any of my other telescopic's now. I've never tried a Bigma, although I might get a quick chance to in the next 2 weeks... my camera guy just ordered one and occasionally lets me demo a lens If your dealing with a local camera store why not see if they'll let you try them both as well.

06-06-2007, 03:53 AM	#5
jeda New Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Belgium Photos: Gallery Posts: 15	The Sigma 135-400 won't work with a teleconvertor because you won't have enough light. No more AF and problems with white balance. On the other hand, the lens is a nice one but I seem to use the lens mostly at the 400mm edge. This means I actually would not need a zoom but more a fixed lens and perhaps would a 500m do better. The lens is usefull for birding but then again, a fixed lens would be better for me since I allways use it at 400mm. ist DL \| K10D \| Sigma 135-400 F4.5-5.6 \| Sigma 17-70, F2.8-4.5 \| Pentax SMC 50-200

06-06-2007, 12:00 PM	#6
KennJ Inactive Account Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Norfolk , Va. Photos: Gallery Posts: 132	For wildlife you will come to wish for the extra 100mm as soon as you start shooting most likely and if you go after birds you will really want that extra 100m. There is a 180-500mm made by Sigma that might be more in line if you do not want to deal with the short end of the Bigma. Kenn

06-06-2007, 12:53 PM	#7
little laker Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,697	I use mine as often at 135mm as I do at 400mm, and often partly in between. I even use it for some macro work. You can focus as close as 2 meters away I've got a 500mm prime that I basically retired the moment that I got this lens. And I haven't missed the extra length at all. Even while shooting wildlife, although I seem to be able to get closer to the animals than most people that I know. I sure wish that I had a dedicated macro lens, so you know what route I'd take if I was in your shoes

06-06-2007, 03:18 PM	#8
713alan Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Houston Posts: 46	How does the lens length compare when fully extended?

06-06-2007, 08:53 PM	#9
rfortson Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Houston TX Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,129	I had the 135-400 for a short while, but sold it and bought the Bigma. The lack of a zoom lock bugged me on the 135-400, and the shots didn't seem to have quite as much contrast, but I also used the lens during the middle of winter when it was pretty dull around here anyway. The Bigma is a great lens in my book. I like superzooms as I generally use the shorter end of the range as well. I took some "macro" shots of wild flowers with the Bigma that I really like. I also like the bokeh of the Bigma. The 135-400 is a good lens for the money, though. I noticed that the Bigma (on a Canon Rebel XT) won the grand prize shot in some Outdoor Photographer magazine contest. It was a beautiful shot taken here in Texas at High Island, and was a very worthy winner. The Bigma (in the right hands...not mine) can take some wonderful shots. The 135-400 can probably do almost as well in the same hands, though. I guess I haven't really added to the decision making process here. I just know I'm glad I've got the Bigma and haven't really missed the 135-400.

06-07-2007, 08:53 AM	#10
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	I think you'll find both these lenses are something that you typically use at the maximum focal length only. I have not tried either, but use my SMC300 F4.0 with both the pentax 1.7x autofocus TC, and with a 2x TC in manual focus. It is a little slow, but I don't have the $ for a really fast long lens. For Birding, I generally use a flash for extra light. I think you will find that for birding you will really want something longer and when I am serious I put on a celestron C90 (1000mm F10) If you limit to 500 mm you can hand hold it, just you don't have the light to really let you do that.