Sigma 150-600mm contemporary

Roy C said:
IMAGES NOW DELETED AS THEY HAVE NOT SHOWN AT THE SIZE I PROCESSED THEM AT (1200 px long). IS THERE A SIZE LIMIT FOR THIS SITE ?
Click to expand...
You're best off just linking from Flickr:
 
odd jim said:
You're best off just linking from Flickr:
Click to expand...
The trouble is that 1200 pixels wide is not a native size on Flickr, if I upload a 1200 px image on Flickr then would it show as 1200 px on here?
EDIT: just uploaded a 1200 pixel wide image to flickr and it resizes it down to 1024 so I am no better off linking it to my Flickr account.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
The trouble is that 1200 pixels wide is not a native size on Flickr, if I upload a 1200 px image on Flickr then would it show as 1200 px on here?
EDIT: just uploaded a 1200 pixel wide image to flickr and it resizes it down to 1024 so I am no better off linking it to my Flickr account.
Click to expand...
Ok, but why is it so crucial to show it as 1200 PX?

A Flickr BB code link will also provide you with a far higher quality image than uploading straight to here, which always seems to soften images.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Ok, but why is it so crucial to show it as 1200 PX?

A Flickr BB code link will also provide you with a far higher quality image than uploading straight to here, which always seems to soften images.
Click to expand...
It is not crucial but I have processed the shots I was going to put on at 1200 px for another forum - I will now resize/re process them to 1024 px like the other shots I have put on this thread.
BTW I do not upload straight to this site anyway, I link to photobucket which I find better than flickr for this purpose.
 
Last edited:
smr said:
According to Dustin Abbott yes.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLXocpM5xno
Click to expand...
Further to my earlier post, attached are a few shots taken with the Siggy 'C' that I would have struggled with my Tammy. Not up to much I will admit but not too bad the focal length-price ratio IMHO.

Swallow in flight by Roy Churchill, on Flickr

Flyer by Roy Churchill, on Flickr


Goldie in flight by Roy Churchill, on Flickr

oyster c 1 by Roy Churchill, on Flickr

Little egret by Roy Churchill, on Flickr

Dunlin in flight by Roy Churchill, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Off to have a look at this lens today as I'd like to have a go a some wildlife photography being mainly a landscaper at the moment. I was thinking about the Nikon 200-500 F5.6 but bang for buck this seems to edge it with IQ being at least as good if not better

Simon
 
Roy C said:
It is not crucial but I have processed the shots I was going to put on at 1200 px for another forum - I will now resize/re process them to 1024 px like the other shots I have put on this thread.
BTW I do not upload straight to this site anyway, I link to photobucket which I find better than flickr for this purpose.
Click to expand...
Photobucket also induces softness to the images, Flickr is far better :)
 
odd jim said:
Photobucket also induces softness to the images, Flickr is far better :)
Click to expand...
Not IMO and I have been using Flickr for many years. If you are happy with linking to Flickr then that is great - each to their own :wave:

PS, Maybe it is why my shots always look sh*t with this lens but they were always OK with the Canon 300/2.8 and 500/4 so I don't know!
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Not IMO and I have been using Flickr for many years. If you are happy with linking to Flickr then that is great - each to their own :wave:

PS, I look forward to seeing some of your brilliant bird shots on here.
Click to expand...
I was just pointing something out, PB has been truly awful for me.

Why mention my bird shots? Not sure if that's a dig? I bought my lens for Motorsport and other wildlife, not birds, though I tested it out on some birds and red squirrels as a matter of fact. If you scroll up, you'll see one of my bird shots, though it's just a grab shot as the lens was being tested so I doubt it would excite anyone.
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
I was just pointing something out, PB has been truly awful for me.

Why mention my bird shots? Not sure if that's a dig? I bought my lens for Motorsport and other wildlife, not birds, though I tested it out on some birds and red squirrels as a matter of fact. If you scroll up, you'll see one of my bird shots, though it's just a grab shot as the lens was being tested so I doubt it would excite anyone.
Click to expand...
I mentioned bird shots because 600mm and heavy crops do look a lot different from a lesser focal length that has not been cropped heavily, all my shots are 600mm and big crops so they do not look that good and I am the first to admit it.
I will post the same image linked to both Flickr and PB just to see if I can see a difference. I did try this several years ago and could not see much difference but maybe something has changed.
I also think that the monitor that folks are viewing on can make a heck of a difference - sometimes a lesser monitor that is overly bright can make images look completely different to a good quality monitor that has been fully calibrated.
One thing I have noticed is that the lens is a lot better on a full frame camera (5D3 in my case) rather than a 1.6 cropper but I am rarely near enough to use the full frame for birds so almost always use the 7D2 even though the IQ is inferior.
 
Last edited:
Below is the same image linked to both Flickr and PhotoBucket . Not sure that I can see much of a difference although the flickr link could be a tad sharper - what do other folks think?


Photo Bucket linked
stonechat%201P_zpsohvjlwl0.jpg


Flickr Linked
Stonechat by Roy Churchill, on Flickr
 
Last edited:
Go to the arrow and select BB code, after selecting the size you want. Then just copy and paste into the post.
 
Does anyone know of any extension tubes (canon fit) that works with this lens. The tubes I have will not AF with this lens (they are fine with all my Canon lenses).
 
Has anyone any experience of using this lens on a far from top end Canon (550D)? I've been considering getting either Sigma or Tamron for a long time and, getting close to pressing 'buy now' have come down on the side of Sigma for no better reason than price. It's significantly cheaper than the Tamron atm and certainly a lot more affordable than when I first looked. I have no intention of using a TC with it. I'm currently using the Tamron 70-300 for birds. So would the 150-600 be okay with my camera, given that the camera itself doesn't have all the bells and whistles?
 
Jannyfox said:
Has anyone any experience of using this lens on a far from top end Canon (550D)? I've been considering getting either Sigma or Tamron for a long time and, getting close to pressing 'buy now' have come down on the side of Sigma for no better reason than price. It's significantly cheaper than the Tamron atm and certainly a lot more affordable than when I first looked. I have no intention of using a TC with it. I'm currently using the Tamron 70-300 for birds. So would the 150-600 be okay with my camera, given that the camera itself doesn't have all the bells and whistles?
Click to expand...
It'll be absolutely fine. The 550d is more than capable, though if you don't have a grip you might want to consider adding one for use with this lens.
 
odd jim said:
It'll be absolutely fine. The 550d is more than capable, though if you don't have a grip you might want to consider adding one for use with this lens.
Click to expand...
Brilliant. I didn't think there'd be a problem but...........I think I'll pass on the grip for now - small hands that are a bit the worse for wear. Small and light suits me, but I'll see how it goes and if it's all too unbalanced a grip is something to consider.
 
I use my sigma attached to a canon 100d without any problems. I enen enjoy carrying it on long walks.
 
simonkit said:
Hi everyone,

My copy arrived in the post today together with the dock... any tips/setup advice I need to know about, also any IQ issues I need to check for?

Thanks

Simon
Click to expand...
First thing I would do Simon is to connect the dock (after downloading the SOP app) It will check that the lens firmware is up to date.
For handolding set the OS (via the dock) to dynamic
You could also set one of the customisation AF speed settings to 'Focus' and one to 'Speed' if you want
For shooting at the long end it pays to stop down to f8 IMO
If shooting on a tripod make sure you turn the OS off.
For hand holding: although the OS is very good always make sure you have a reasonable shutter speed for the focal length you are using - you may occasional get sharp shots at ridiculously slow shutter speeds but use a decent shutter speed for consistency.
Other than that you are going to get the best IQ by shooting in RAW, using a good workflow and practicing all the usual photographic skills.
 
Last edited:
to be honest Roy, and only IMHO, there is just a little bit of softness in (some) of the images - I think that maybe they could be sharpened a little more in pp without a detrimental effect - but it certainly looks a very good lens for the money

did you take the images as RAW or jpeg?

also maybe if you "back off" with the crop a little it would help

not at all a criticism, but you an observation - I am looking at the images on my 5K screen

(the Stonechat and pigeon look really good)
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
to be honest Roy, and only IMHO, there is just a little bit of softness in (some) of the images - I think that maybe they could be sharpened a little more in pp without a detrimental effect - but it certainly looks a very good lens for the money

did you take the images as RAW or jpeg?

also maybe if you "back off" with the crop a little it would help

not at all a criticism, but you an observation - I am looking at the images on my 5K screen

(the Stonechat and pigeon look really good)
Click to expand...
Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).
I always shoot in RAW (cannot remember the last time I took a jpeg image) and I also have a fully calibrated IPS monitor so do know the flaws in the lens. With regards to the sharpening I blow hot and cold over just how much an image should be sharpened (I use selective sharpening with layer masks and also some topaz plug-ins) - at the moment I am in a 'less sharping mode' because there as so many images out there that are woefully over sharpened and look dreadful to me. Backing off with the cropping is a valued comment but at the end of the day images from this lens are never going to be up to the much more expensive super teles that's for sure - you get what you pay for.
One thing I have noticed with this lens is that it performs a lot better with my FF (5D3) than the 7D2 but I am mostly always range limited for birds so tend to use the 7D2 most of the time - this image was taken on the 7D2). Anyway thanks for you feedback Bill, this thread is very limiting as far as good banter goes.
PS, just noticed that I had put the wrong curlew image up LOL. now rectified.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).
I always shoot in RAW (cannot remember the last time I took a jpeg image) and I also have a fully calibrated IPS monitor so do know the flaws in the lens. With regards to the sharpening I blow hot and cold over just how much an image should be sharpened (I use selective sharpening with layer masks and also some topaz plug-ins) - at the moment I am in a 'less sharping mode' because there as so many images out there that are woefully over sharpened and look dreadful to me. Backing off with the cropping is a valued comment but at the end of the day images from this lens are never going to be up to the much more expensive super teles that's for sure - you get what you pay for.
One thing I have noticed with this lens is that it performs a lot better with my FF (5D3) than the 7D2 but I am mostly always range limited for birds so tend to use the 7D2 most of the time - this image was taken on the 7D2). Anyway thanks for you feedback Bill, this thread is very limiting as far as good banter goes.
Click to expand...

looking at the above images in a slightly different like, the images do look good and I agree with you about the weight - I bought a Nikon 300f4PF a few months ago and mated with my D750 + 1.4TC it is very liberating....... and a lot more flexible than using a 300mm f2.8VR ....... in fact I don't anymore.
I also agree that FF or FX is the way to go - I have always been disappointed with the Nikon D7xxx DX bodies, I have had all three, bought the D7200 a few weeks ago, again, same "noise" problem and it is in for the chop the next time I am in the UK, (I have some good shots, but the sensor needs good light and conditions).

This DX sensor business saying "it gives you extra reach" is an illusion IMHO, all it does produce is a cropped FF sensor image.

I'm tempted with the Sigma lens looking at what it produces
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
Having owned some Canon superteles in the past BIll (500/4, 300/2.8) I agree that most of the images are a tad soft and certainly not up to the big whites but for around £700 its great value for money. Most importantly for me is the weight (less than 2kg) as I am no longer up to carrying the big whites (that's why I had to get rid of the big lenses).
I always shoot in RAW (cannot remember the last time I took a jpeg image) and I also have a fully calibrated IPS monitor so do know the flaws in the lens. With regards to the sharpening I blow hot and cold over just how much an image should be sharpened (I use selective sharpening with layer masks and also some topaz plug-ins) - at the moment I am in a 'less sharping mode' because there as so many images out there that are woefully over sharpened and look dreadful to me. Backing off with the cropping is a valued comment but at the end of the day images from this lens are never going to be up to the much more expensive super teles that's for sure - you get what you pay for.
One thing I have noticed with this lens is that it performs a lot better with my FF (5D3) than the 7D2 but I am mostly always range limited for birds so tend to use the 7D2 most of the time - this image was taken on the 7D2). Anyway thanks for you feedback Bill, this thread is very limiting as far as good banter goes.
PS, just noticed that I had put the wrong curlew image up LOL. now rectified.
Click to expand...
The only softness I've noticed on mine was down to user error (camera movement).

I'm finding this to be a very, very sharp lens, even maxed out to 600mm
 
odd jim said:
The only softness I've noticed on mine was down to user error (camera movement).

I'm finding this to be a very, very sharp lens, even maxed out to 600mm
Click to expand...
Well I guess its all subjective, I am comparing mine with shots I have taken in the past with a couple of Canon super teles and it is certainly not up to those lenses as you would expect. At the end of the day if these cheap(ish) third party lenses were as good as the much more expensive offerings from Canon and Nikon they why would anyone pay £5k or more for a big super tele - there is a reason, and its not just that they are faster. The biggest difference I find is in really fine detail on birds feathers and also the crop-ability of distant shots. If I could handle the weight of a Canon 500/4 IS MkII I would sell my Siggy tomorrow.
I am glad you are liking your lens though.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
First thing I would do Simon is to connect the dock (after downloading the SOP app) It will check that the lens firmware is up to date.
For handolding set the OS (via the dock) to dynamic
You could also set one of the customisation AF speed settings to 'Focus' and one to 'Speed' if you want
For shooting at the long end it pays to stop down to f8 IMO
If shooting on a tripod make sure you turn the OS off.
For hand holding: although the OS is very good always make sure you have a reasonable shutter speed for the focal length you are using - you may occasional get sharp shots at ridiculously slow shutter speeds but use a decent shutter speed for consistency.
Other than that you are going to get the best IQ by shooting in RAW, using a good workflow and practicing all the usual photographic skills.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advice Roy, I've updated to the latest firmware and setup the "dynamic view" option, probably leave the AF settings as they are until I've had chance to use the lens.. looking forward to putting it to the test.

On the search for a suitable bag to carry the lens with body attached with space for maybe one more lens, would appreciate some suggestions.. ideally nothing larger than necessary

Simon
 
Roy C said:
Well I guess its all subjective, I am comparing mine with shots I have taken in the past with a couple of Canon super teles and it is certainly not up to those lenses as you would expect. At the end of the day if these cheap(ish) third party lenses were as good as the much more expensive offerings from Canon and Nikon they why would anyone pay £5k or more for a big super tele - there is a reason, and its not just that they are faster. The biggest difference I find is in really fine detail on birds feathers and also the crop-ability of distant shots. If I could handle the weight of a Canon 500/4 IS MkII I would sell my Siggy tomorrow.
I am glad you are liking your lens though.
Click to expand...
Yes indeed, it's not going to compare directly to a 500mm f/4 but I'm comparing it to my shorter Canon L lenses, a couple of well regarded Sigma EX lenses and some nice Canon primes :)
 
Last edited:
odd jim said:
Yes indeed, it's not going to compare directly to a 500mm f/4 but I'm comparing it to my shorter Canon L lenses, a couple of well regarded Sigma EX lenses and some nice Canon primes :)
Click to expand...
Good for you I am glad you are enjoying the lens. I have several other Canon L lenses but I find it hard to compare Macro, landscape and 70-200 lens with a long tele zoom like this. As I have only used the lens 7 or 8 times in the last 6 months I am not that bothered to be honest, at the price its a nice lens for the occasional birding sortie ;)
 
as @Roy C knows i have been deliberating for a while and took the plunge about 3 weeks ago unfortunately due to circumstances have not had a real chance to use it extensively or even plug the dock in, its replacing a 300f4+1.4 converter, the little I have used the Sigma I have to say i am impressed with af speed and sharpness.

Have been following this thread for along time the custom setting that everyone appears to like is OS set to dynamic, does this have to be done via a custom setting or does it remain set in normal use?
 
RKC said:
as @Roy C knows i have been deliberating for a while and took the plunge about 3 weeks ago unfortunately due to circumstances have not had a real chance to use it extensively or even plug the dock in, its replacing a 300f4+1.4 converter, the little I have used the Sigma I have to say i am impressed with af speed and sharpness.

Have been following this thread for along time the custom setting that everyone appears to like is OS set to dynamic, does this have to be done via a custom setting or does it remain set in normal use?
Click to expand...
What you do Bob is to assign dynamic OS (via the dock) to one of the two custom configurations (say C1). You can then then switch the C1 set on or off via the lens switch, if you do not switch C1 or C2 on then the lens will be at its default settings.
BTW if nothing else its worth doing the firmware update (via the dock)
EDIT: With C1, C2 and OFF you have in effect 3 different lens configurations, also you can switch the OS off on the lens which will nullify any setting you have in C1 or C2 with regards to the OS.
If you set-your own focus limiters this will take effect for all the configration including the focus limiter switch on the lens - you cannot revert back to the default limiters unless you go back in via the dock and re-configure it back.
 
Last edited:
Roy C said:
What you do Bob is to assign dynamic OS (via the dock) to one of the two custom configurations (say C1). You can then then switch the C1 set on or off via the lens switch, if you do not switch C1 or C2 on then the lens will be at its default settings.
BTW if nothing else its worth doing the firmware update (via the dock)
EDIT: With C1, C2 and OFF you have in effect 3 different lens configurations, also you can switch the OS off on the lens which will nullify any setting you have in C1 or C2 with regards to the OS.
If you set-your own focus limiters this will take effect for all the configration including the focus limiter switch on the lens - you cannot revert back to the default limiters unless you go back in via the dock and re-configure it back.
Click to expand...


Cheers mate have to find time and set this up, thanks for clarification re dynamic OS
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top