Larry Ingram's reviews

  • Sigma 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 EX OS APO

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very sharp images, good auto focus and built to last
    None I know of yet, it's heavy, but I expected that.

    I bought the new DG version of this lens just over a week ago, hoping that the image stabilizer would help me get relatively sharp shots while hand holding. Due to age I am not as steady as I once was, plus because we now all can see our images in great detail on computer screens I am now much more aware of camera shake than I used to be. Well it's fair to say this lens blew me away, the images from my first batch of test shots were way beyond my highest expectations. I am using it on a Canon 20D which makes the lens become a 128-640 in relative terms due to the sensor size. Rather than go into details here I will list the link to the message on the sister forum of this where I have uploaded several as shot full resolution images, which you can download & evaluate yourself, plus another regular there has posted some similar shots using his Canon 100-400 L lens for an accurate comparison. I am still trying to learn how to hold it correctly, this is one of the bigest & heaviest lenses I have ever owned by a big factor. (recently also bought the Sigma 50-500 which is similar in size & weight).
    http://www.photo-forums.com/[email protected]@.eea24b8/0
    Hope this is helpful to anyone considering this lens.

    reviewed April 2nd, 2006 (purchased for $1,000)

  • Sigma 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DG OS APO

    10 out of 10 points and recommended
    The image stabilizer makes it hand holdable in decent light.
    It's big and heavy, but there is no way I know of to avoid that.

    I wrote this review and placed it with the older non DG version before this proper place was added. So far I am still amazed at the results I can get hand holding it
    I bought the new DG version of this lens just over a week ago, hoping that the image stabilizer would help me get relatively sharp shots while hand holding. Due to age I am not as steady as I once was, plus because we now all can see our images in great detail on computer screens I am now much more aware of camera shake than I used to be. Well it's fair to say this lens blew me away, the images from my first batch of test shots were way beyond my highest expectations. I am using it on a Canon 20D which makes the lens become a 128-640 in relative terms due to the sensor size. Rather than go into details here I will list the link to the message on the sister forum of this where I have uploaded several as shot full resolution images, which you can download & evaluate yourself, plus another regular there has posted some similar shots using his Canon 100-400 L lens for an accurate comparison. I am still trying to learn how to hold it correctly, this is one of the bigest & heaviest lenses I have ever owned by a big factor. (recently also bought the Sigma 50-500 which is similar in size & weight).
    http://www.photo-forums.com/[email protected]@.eea24b8/0
    Hope this is helpful to anyone considering this lens.

    reviewed April 15th, 2006 (purchased for $1,000)

  • Sigma 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 DC

    9 out of 10 points and recommended
    Very versatile lens, covers most needed range, light & small.
    none for a lens of this type or cost as far as I am concerned.

    I pre ordered one of these as soon as my local camera dealer said they were available, and have been very happy I did. After a full year and over 4,000 shots I think it a much better lens than most people give it credit for. Recently I bought a used Canon 17-85 IS lens and a 17-40 F4 L and carefully compared both against the Sigma, and the results were far from expected, the Sigma blows the much more expensive 17-85 away in the wide end, and never really catches up. The very highly rated Canon 17-40 L really wasn't that big of a step up either in the same range that both can cover. For a longer review complete with many full resolution images that you can view or download to compare, which are as shot with no enhancing of any kind use the link provided, the review is on the sister site at Imaging Resource, and was started almost a year ago, and I have finished what I think is a fair test with proof of my findings.
    http://www.photo-forums.com/[email protected]@.ee9ea20/0

    reviewed April 22nd, 2006 (purchased for $530)