# Sigma 400mm F/5.6 APO for $175..



## Markw (Dec 16, 2010)

Comes with a nikon lens case and is in excellent shape.  I would use it with my D300s.  Any thoughts?  Good deal?

Mark


----------



## Markw (Dec 16, 2010)

The actual question, I guess, should be would the quality be better with this lens or my Nikon 80-200/2.8D with a TC?

Mark


----------



## tirediron (Dec 16, 2010)

For that price I'd say go for it. It's a full frame lens, so even if it's a little soft in the corners, no matter, you'll not be using them anyway.


----------



## Bram (Dec 17, 2010)

Do it! What doy ou have to lose? It's less then 200 bones and you get 400mm! I'd do it.


----------



## Markw (Dec 17, 2010)

Soo..I think I am gonig to go for it.  Odd, though.  It's white.  It is going to be a little odd walking around with a white lens on a Nikon, but hey.  I dont mind.

Mark


----------



## Nikon_Dude (Dec 18, 2010)

I'd be very interested to see the results.


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 18, 2010)

Markw said:


> The actual question, I guess, should be would the quality be better with this lens or my Nikon 80-200/2.8D with a TC?
> 
> Mark



I onced owned a sigma 400mm apo and I my nikon 80-200/2.8d AFS with a teleconverter is just as sharp.

Although $175 is a good price for the lens, you won't lose anything if you decide to resell it.

If you're looking for a long lens on a budget I'd look for a nikon 300mm f4.5 ais.  Although manual focus, it's incredibly sharp--and works great with a teleconverter.


----------



## Markw (Dec 18, 2010)

I am trying to stay away from MF. I was looking at a Nikon 300mm F/2.8 for $750, but decided against it becasue I dont think that I would like the MF. I tried it out today with my 80-200/2.8 and I couldn't stand it with the thicket that is associated with birds. 

I have got the price dropped to $165 shipped second day to my door with a 14 day guarantee on the 400/5.6 I will be sending the money tomorrow and the lens will be shipped out either tomorrow or monday. It comes with a Nikon CL-42 lens case and Hoya UV filter.

Mark


----------



## MrLogic (Dec 19, 2010)

^ Just curious, but why didn't you go with the - apparently - clearly superior 400mm f/5.6 AF APO "Macro" version of this lens? 

There's one on eBay right now, in excellent condition, albeit overpriced. 

SIGMA 400mm f/5.6 AF APO TELE MACRO LENS for NIKON - eBay (item 200549722443 end time Dec-30-10 18:19:45 PST)

But you may have better luck elsewhere...


----------



## Markw (Dec 19, 2010)

Because that is alot more than I am looking to spend on this lens.  I will be getting a different, "better" supertelephoto ASAP and if I was going to spend $600+, I would only do it once.  At $165, theres really not much to lose here.  At $675, there's alot to lose.  Especially since I probably could not resell it for that.  I doubt it sells for that in the first place.

Mark


----------



## MrLogic (Dec 19, 2010)

Markw said:


> Especially since I probably could not resell it for that.  I doubt it sells for that in the first place.
> 
> Mark



Correct. That's why I said it was overpriced and that you may have better luck elsewhere. 

Or another time. They come up on eBay every so often.


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 19, 2010)

Markw said:


> I am trying to stay away from MF. I was looking at a Nikon 300mm F/2.8 for $750, but decided against it becasue I dont think that I would like the MF. I tried it out today with my 80-200/2.8 and I couldn't stand it with the thicket that is associated with birds.
> 
> I have got the price dropped to $165 shipped second day to my door with a 14 day guarantee on the 400/5.6 I will be sending the money tomorrow and the lens will be shipped out either tomorrow or monday. It comes with a Nikon CL-42 lens case and Hoya UV filter.
> 
> Mark



Understandable, although the manual focus on most autofocus lenses sucks compared to a purpose-built manual focus lens.

Be sure to report back with a review of the lens.


----------



## Markw (Dec 24, 2010)

I am sure that it does, but my reaction time to focus any MF lens sucks compared to any normal homo-sapien. 

Mark


----------



## Markw (Dec 27, 2010)

Well, I just paid for the Sigma 400mm F/5.6 APO, Nikon CL-32 case, Hoya CPOL, and Hoya UV..all for $165 shipped second day air. It should be at my door Wednesday. :mrgreen:  I will post photos and a review once it gets here and I have time to play with it. mrgreen: once more for new gear)

Mark


----------



## benhasajeep (Dec 27, 2010)

And don't forget that it is actually a 600mm f/5.6 on your D300.  You just got your 600 f/4.0 for $165  

Yes, its not really the same thing, but a 600mm effective reach is really nice to have.    Just remember the sweet spot will be a stop or two up from f/5.6.


----------



## Markw (Dec 27, 2010)

I believe it is F/8 for this lens.  I was thinking about picking up a Kenko 1.4x Pro300 to use with the lens and see how that works.  I will have to stop up to about F/9, but I think the D300s' ISO capabilities can handle going up a tad if I shoot in RAW.  Any ideas?

Mark


----------



## benhasajeep (Dec 27, 2010)

Markw said:


> I believe it is F/8 for this lens. I was thinking about picking up a Kenko 1.4x Pro300 to use with the lens and see how that works. I will have to stop up to about F/9, but I think the D300s' ISO capabilities can handle going up a tad if I shoot in RAW. Any ideas?
> 
> Mark


 
I have the new Sigma 150-500 OS and was dissapointed with it and a 2x Kenko teleconverter.  The pictures were useable but just not quite sharp enough.  With some experimenting I found that if I came back to about 450mm and used around f/11 the combo was its sharpest.  But still not as good as the lens on its own and just cropping in on the computer.  I do have a Kenko 1.5x but not the Pro 300 like the 1.4x.  It was a bit better than the 2x, but still not quite what I like.  The 1.4x may perform better.  And since your new lens is not a zoom, you will probably get better results because of that as well.  I think you did the right thing.  It was a good price for what you got.  And will be more than capable of giving you great results.


----------



## Markw (Dec 27, 2010)

That's refreshing to hear.  If I end up not liking the lens, I will sell it and be on the look out for the BIGMOS.  I was going to get the MC7 (the 1.5x I presume you have), but Ive heard that the PRO300 series are far superior in the quality of images they produce.  I was thinking about stopping my combo down about 2 stops from the minimum and seeing how it goes.  Should be quite an experiment.

Mark


----------



## mwcfarms (Dec 27, 2010)

Congrats Mark thats exciting and what a steal. Where did you find this deal. Other Nikonians are curious.


----------



## Markw (Dec 27, 2010)

Thanks!

It was actualy on ebay. It was only on there for about 15 minutes. I had just enough time to message the seller for photos of the glass, and someone already bought it (asking price wsa $210). I got an email saying that the lens was already sold (within 15 mins!) After about two more days, I got a message from the same man with the photos and a message saying that the payment had never gone through. I asked him to sell it for $165 including shipping and he agreed to get around ebay fees. I purchased it immediately and it is currently on its way to my home. :mrgreen:

Mark


----------



## djacobox372 (Dec 27, 2010)

To put this deal in perspective a 600mm f5.6 manual focus nikon lens sells for around $2000 on ebay.

I own one and it works amazing with my d700, I'd be curious how the 400mm on a crop body stacks up.


----------



## Markw (Dec 27, 2010)

Ship me your D700 and 600mm F/5.6 and Ill let you know just how it stacks up. 

Kidding, of course.  I am interested as well.  I would imagine, just by rule of thumb, that the Nikkor will have far superior photo output.  But who knows..it could be surprising.  Hopefully it is. :mrgreen:

Mark


----------



## Markw (Dec 29, 2010)

Out for delivery on 12/29/10 at 3:09am

:mrgreen:
Mark


----------



## Markw (Dec 31, 2010)

Mark


----------



## Bram (Dec 31, 2010)

What a beauty! If you ever want to get rid of it let me know. :thumbup:


----------



## Markw (Dec 31, 2010)

Youll be the first to know! :mrgreen:

Mark


----------



## nikon19804 (Sep 3, 2011)

Hey Mark. It's been a while since you got your lens. How about an update on how/if you like it. I had a Sigma 400mm APO some time back. Good performer. Accidentally dropped it from a wildlife viewing platform. When I "replaced" it, I replaced it with its direct competition, a Tokina 400mm AT-X SD. Always thought that the Tokina was just a tad "snappier" than the Sigma, but both are great lenses.


----------



## Markw (Sep 5, 2011)

It's been a while indeed.  It's really hard for me to judge how I liked the lens.  The lens I had turned out to have fungus on one of the internal elements, and it made alot of the photos look pretty bad.  When shooting a directly-lit subject, I somehow got around the fungus, and the photos always turned out very good.  I thought the AF was reasonably slow, but not as slow as I expected it to be.  The lens really was a featherweight and almost felt like a toy to carry around.  Compared to any lens I've ever owned, including the fantastic plastic 50/1.8.  It was metal, sure.  But it still felt really, REALLY small and toy-ish.  

So, in all, I would have liked the lens, and _maybe_ still owned it, if it weren't for the fungus.  The extra length was greatly appreciated.  The AF was reasonably fast when used in sunny conditions, as fast as to be expected, on my D300s.  The build felt toy-like, but was solid.  If I were to be in the market for a comparable lens again, I'd probably either get a faster prime, or at least the Macro version so it will focus closer than 15'.

Hope this helped a little.
Mark


----------



## nikon19804 (Sep 5, 2011)

Bummer! From the photos, I thought the lens looked like a "honey." Lately, looking on the net, there have been several other folks who seem to think that the Sigmas in this class ( 400mm f/5.6, all three "flavors" ) had a problem with internal fungus. Really too bad. I was thinking that, if I could find one like yours for "not a great deal of money", then I would like to buy it and do a side-by-side road test against my Tokina AT-X just to see for myself which was the better lens. Looks like I should save my money.
So ... you still "wishin" for the 150-500 Sigma or are you seeing fungi in your sleep?


----------



## Markw (Sep 5, 2011)

I'm still wishing for the lens.  But I guess I should change that to the 50-500 OS.  That mishap doesnt scare me away from Sigma lenses in the least.  I've owned their 18-50/2.8 EX DC, and 50, 105, and 180mm Macro lenses.  All of which were beautiful performers.  My 180/3.5 is probably my favorite lens I've ever owned.  And I will probably sell my 35/1.8 and 50/1.8 to pick up their 50/1.4 which is supposed to be better than any Nikkor competitor. The fungus of that lens really isn't such a big deal to me.  The lens was something like 30 years old.  That's the risk you run, I guess. 

Mark


----------



## nikon19804 (Dec 22, 2011)

Hey Mark. Me again. Just wanted to let you know that I recently bought not one, but two of these Sigma 400mm APO lenses on Ebay. The first was listed in "good" condition and and didn't sell for very much. While waiting for it to arrive, another in "Like Brand New", "hardly ever used" condition was listed, complete with leather case, original box, "directions and warranty". I won that one, too. Long story short, each lens had an interior element completely hazed-over with fungus, the "Like New" lens even worse than the other. Couldn't convince the seller on the second that the problem actually existed, so I had to contact Ebay Buyer Protection. Just got word last night that I may return the lens for a refund. Man, is it a shame. You should see this lens. On the outside it looks like it just came off the production line. Anyway, "Caveat Emptor" when buying one of these lenses. You sure can't judge THIS book by its cover.


----------



## Derrel (Dec 22, 2011)

"a stop or two up from f/5.6"

A stop "up" from f/5.6 is f/4...two stops "up" would be f/2.8.

When you stop a lens down, you go to smaller apertures...."well stopped-down" is f/8,f/11,etc...


----------

