SIGMA 150-500MM f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM APO Lens

[modchild]

I'm sure this will already have been covered somewhere in the forum but, the mrs asked me what I wanted for xmas and I really dont know. I've seen them on Onestop Digital for under £650. What I really need to know is just how good they are, sharpness, image and build quality, ease of use etc. I'm sure some of you could help me make up my mind.

 

[roseway]

I bought one very recently, but I haven't yet used it enough to make firm conclusions about it. It's big and heavy (obviously) but in good light it's quite usable handheld. The OS seems to work well. I took some handheld shots of the moon a few days ago, and they were OK. The AF occasionally hunted a bit, but mostly the focus locked on with no difficulty. I'm happy with it, but I have a lot more to do.

 

[JohnN]

I used to own one (before the 100-400 then the 400mm prime), but it was pretty good, as mentioned the OS is in my opinion excellent, only being bettered bu the VC on the Tamron I own.

Bear in mind I'm not very good, but here is my gallery from when I owned the lens and I always used it handheld and didn't find it that bothersome until I'd hit 4-5 hours use.

As Eric says, light is key with this lens.

 

[artyman]

I've had mine for a few years and nothing comes close in terms of value for money, are there sharper lenses, yes, but at a much higher price. The newer Sigma 50-500 OS version is deemed to be marginally better but costs more. I've been very happy with the images that I have got from mine.

 

[WillyB]

I took the plunge and haven't regretted it one bit. It is quite heavy but manageable.

Here's a couple I have taken with it.

 

[yaaan]

I bought one of these a couple of months ago for my trip to Uganda. I've just come back so will be posting a few photos in the coming days so you can see what they are like, but generally it performed pretty well and certainly my limits are reached before those of the lens!

It's a heavy old beast to be carrying around all day but for value for money I don't think you can go far wrong with this and I've had some pretty pleasing results.

ETA these are all taken with the 150-500 and are pretty reasonable I think.


Eagle_Flight2 by Yaaan74, on Flickr

Lioness1 by Yaaan74, on Flickr

Egyptian Cobra by Yaaan74, on Flickr

 

[modchild]

Thanks guys for the heads up. Not really worried about the weight as I've already got a 100-400 L. The pics are all terrific that you've posted. Still not sure the extra 100 reach will make it worthwhile though. Just can't think of anything else for christmas. Except maybe go the other way and get an MP-E65 Macro and scare myself silly taking bugs. Thanks again.

 

[squishy]

I don't see any reason get this if you already have a 100-400.

It's a terrific value lens, but the difference in focal length is actually surprisingly small between the two*, and all the 150-500 owners I know pull back to ~400mm nearly all the time for sharper results anyway.

My personal experience (tallies with most comparisons I've read as well) is that the sigma at 400mm f/8 is pretty much as sharp as the canon at 400mm f/5.6, and the canon gets sharper when stopped down.

*The optical design of the sigma means that as focus is pulled in from infinity the focal length gets shorter, making it more like 450mm than 500mm. There isn't a big enough difference to get shots with the sigma that you couldn't get with the canon by just cropping a little bit.

If you're looking for a lens to go alongside your 100-400, my choice would be the 400mm f/5.6 prime. I chose the 100-400 instead of this because most of the time it shoots my shooting style better, but I do think the 400mm would make a nice addition to my collection (maybe some day) for those times when I know I'm not going to want shorter focal lengths, IS or closer focussing like when I'm going out to bird hides. The 400 prime has unbeatable image quality and focus speed in it's price range, a lot of people say it's the lens for birds in flight since it's so quick and lightweight (I'm sure plenty of users on here can attest to that).
That way you'd have the 400 for when you want the best image quality and the 100-400 for when you want the flexibility of the zoom/IS/closer focussing.

Just my 2p worth

 

[artyman]

If you already have the 100-400 a Sigma 150-500 isn't going to make as much difference in range as you might think. If you are intent on 500mm the the Canon 500 f4 with a 1.4 extender or possibly the new Sigma 120-300 f2.8 OS with a 2X to make a worthwhile difference in range.

 

[modchild]

Think I'm gonna go with the MP-E65 instead. Just got to find a good one now.

 

[squishy]

Don't forget the Mt-24ex flash to go with it
(there's really no point having the MPE-65 unless you invest in some proper lighting for it as well, either a well diffused speedlight on a bracket or more popularly the twin flash system, which can create superbly diffused light when used properly)

Good luck with the mpe, high mag is infuriating and addictive in roughly equal measures :bonk:

 

[modchild]

I've managed to find one at a price I'm more than happy with. I've already got a ringflash to go with the 100 L Macro and I've checked that it's compatible with the MP-E so I should be ok. I know what you mean about infuriating though, the little bleeders keep moving just as your about to press the button.