sigma 120-400 or 150-500 lens

S

spennie

Messages
19
Name
jason
Edit My Images
No
I was going to buy the 120-400, but then i saw there was'nt much diffrance in price between the 400 and 500, so now i'm wondering which one to have, i need it for wildlife, sport(i take photos for the local cycling club) and the odd air show. Can someone help?What are the pros and cons between the two?
 
I used the 150-500 for three years and it's the best value for money telephoto lens out there in my opinion. As regards choice between 120-400 and the 150-500, as a general rule with wildlife you can never have too long a lens, birds have great eyesight and can read the focal length from the front of a lens and will move away appropriately just to spite you.
 
How do you find walking with it and taking shots without a tripod? Does it seem heavy or not?
 
I had until recently, the Sigma 150-500mm f6.3 and its a beast to carry around, (when teamed up with a tripod and a battery grip- its a real LUMP)

Ive now opted for the Sigma 100-300mm f4 and a teleconvertor, much easier to handle and half the weight


Les (y)
 
I have the 150-500mm and it's fine taking shots without a tripod (as I don't have one yet!) and I've carried it through the jungle in Uganda looking for gorillas without problems. It's not lightweight and you'll know you're carrying it but it's not so heavy as to be unacceptable. Use the tripod foot as a handle and it's fine :)
 
I've got a Sigma 150-500 OS and I use it as my wildlife and aircraft go to lens. I'm so impressed with the lens that I've just put my Canon 100-400 L up for sale in the classifieds. The OS/IS system is brilliant on the Sigma and the IQ at the long end is about equal to the 100-400 L. Sure it's heavy, but it's well built and the tripod mount makes it easy to carry when not shooting. I've only put mine on a tripod when I've been taking pics of the moon, the rest of the time I use it handheld. I bought mine from Panamoz.com and is currently £594 + p&p with a 3 year warranty.
 
I carried mine without a problem, usually had a monopod with me, to help when standing still waiting for birds for long periods, but I managed handheld. If you want heavy, try the new 120-300 f2.8, I was waving that around for four hours at Silverstone on Monday :D
 
Never used the Sigma 150-500 but regularly use my Sigma 50-500mm for bird pics if you want another to consider and have no complaints about it at all. Consistently produces nice sharp images and focuses extremely fast and quietly.

I know it's never going to be as good as the big Canon primes but for my budget it was the best bit of kit I've ever bought. (y)
 
artyman said:
I carried mine without a problem, usually had a monopod with me, to help when standing still waiting for birds for long periods, but I managed handheld. If you want heavy, try the new 120-300 f2.8, I was waving that around for four hours at Silverstone on Monday :D
Click to expand...

Or the 200-500 f2.8. That's definitely a tripod only lens.
 
I can't provide the comparison you ask for but I've just come back from Antarctica and Iguazu Falls and the Sigma has done a great job on wildlife and landscapes for me.

I used it handheld most of the time but sometimes used a monopod onboard the small expedition ship we were on as the sea could be fairly rough. For landings and at Iguazu Falls it was hand held all of the time. Either way, focus was quick and images were sharp.

The only downside was the weight. After a day of using it on my Canon 600D, along with my Sigma 18-250, my shoulder blades were aching somewhat!
 
scottthehat said:
save more and get the 50-500mm os well worth the extra and the best lens in this range, and even alotof 100-400mm owners are now saying that the 50-500mmos is sharper wide open and a better lens.
Click to expand...

Don't say that i decided against 50-500 and am waiting for 150-500 from panamoz!
 
I've owned both and while the OS is the better lens, the 150 is pretty good too - I have a load of images in my flickr (listed under lenses), but honestly its a cracker for the money.
 
scottthehat said:
sorry its worth the extra, have had 2x 150-500mm in different mountand the 50-500mm os knocks the spots off of them but then so did my 4 170-500mm.
Click to expand...

Were they both os versions?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top