I personally think that focus/tracking is more to do with the camera than Lens!. I have not done that much BIF with the 150-600 c but what I have its has done very well. A 300/4 prime compared to a 600/6.3 zoom are two very different lenses - if 300mm is enough for you then I would stick with that but if you want more reach then the 150-600 is going to be better than the 300/4 + tc's IMHO. For IQ the Siggy at 420mm will beat the 300/4 + 1.4x tc IMO and at 600mm the Siggy will most definitely beat the 300/4 + 2x tc.Having read this whole thread through this morning, i haven't seen many comments regards to focus/tracking of BIF (Birds In Flight) as this would be one of my main concerns coming from a Nikon 300mm f4 prime as i really can't justify owning 2 lenses in this sort of price bracket
So, how do you guys who own it rate it a focus/tracking of BIF?
I also had a Tamron 150-600 Rich but got rid of it as I did not like the AF performance on it - in that respect I much prefer the Siggy 150-600 c although basic IQ is very similar. Another plus for the Siggy is that it takes a 1.4x tc very well considering it is at f9 - AF is fine on the right Camera (I have 7D2 and 5D3 and it AF's fairly well at 840mm).Cheers @Roy C
And that is the main problem, 300mm is not enough for my needs, but at the time of buying it was the best option at the time, with the recent additions of the Tammy, Sigmas and soon the Nikon 200-500mm i'm in a rather tricky spot as i am spoilt for IQ with the 300mm, i'm pretty happy with it using a 1.4x TC, however, having tried it with a 1.7x TC i was not happy with the IQ
So trying to find a replacement for the 300mm is proving rather tricky as i know i will lose out on IQ around the 300mm mark compared to my current setup, but hopefully gain IQ over 300mm
The only other experience i have had with these long telezooms is from a friend of mine who bought a Tamron 150-600mm and said he could never get to grips with it for BiF, he has now returned to a Canon 400 f5.6
I also had a Tamron 150-600 Rich but got rid of it as I did not like the AF performance on it - in that respect I much prefer the Siggy 150-600 c although basic IQ is very similar. Another plus for the Siggy is that it takes a 1.4x tc very well considering it is at f9 - AF is fine on the right Camera (I have 7D2 and 5D3 and it AF's fairly well at 840mm).
I know what you mean about comparing with decent primes as I had the highly rated Canon 300/2.8 IS MKI for several years - a stunning lens but with my Canon 2x tc MkII it did not come up to the Siggy at 600mm in my experience, even though it was faster at f5.6 against the siggy's f6.3. Its all about compromises, the ideal situation is a 300/2.8 prime (even much better than a 300/4), AND a 600/4 or 500/4 prime but the cost would be unjustifiable for most folk. Best of luck whatever you go for.
I think you are wise waiting for the Nikon 200-500/5.6 Rich. None of these Cheap(ish) zoom lenses are going to come up to a decent Canon or Nikon super telephoto prime but they are all good value for money providing you work within their limitations.Cheers, good to hear from someone who has had such a broad range of lenses
I think i'll hold off till some decent reviews of the 200-500mm f5.6 come out, as that lens will fall in just between the 2 Sigmas price wise, and being a constant f5.6 is a bonus too, and being a Nikon lens i'd hope it would be pretty decent and possibly more cropable than the Sigma at full stretch
At a stretch i could possibly justify owning my 300mm f4 and the Sigma C, but i just don't know if i would get use out of having 2 lenses so similar in focal length, how do other folk manage having multiple lenses of similar FL, do you take both with you just in case, or do you decide before you head out which you will need, as i would be in the latter category and always go for the longer FL "just in case"
A dock question,
I have the feeling my lens needs some fine tuning for my V2,i would only want to do it @600mm for this camera so the question is,if i fine tune with the Dock @ 600mm for the V2 the chances are it will be wrong on the D750 am i right in thinking so long as i dont go beyond the tuning range in the D750, camera tuning could compensate for the lens tuning i have done.
The question makes sense to me hope it does to you.
how do other folk manage having multiple lenses of similar FL, do you take both with you just in case, or do you decide before you head out which you will need, as i would be in the latter category and always go for the longer FL "just in case"
I would never take two 'long' lenses out with me, too much hassle and weight for a start, though circumstances would dictate which I took ... for example I had the Sigma 300-800 and Tamron 150-600 at the same time but the 300-800 would only be taken out in the knowledge that its length and weight limited where and how it could be used.
I like the idea of the 200-500 but now having the 500 f4 I can't see me getting much use from it unless it equalled the 500 f4 and from what I can see, good though it may be, it won't.
I always do my AF micro adjusting in the Camera (not the lens via the dock) and save it per lens - that way you can accommodate using a particular lens on more than one Camera.A dock question,
I have the feeling my lens needs some fine tuning for my V2,i would only want to do it @600mm for this camera so the question is,if i fine tune with the Dock @ 600mm for the V2 the chances are it will be wrong on the D750 am i right in thinking so long as i dont go beyond the tuning range in the D750, camera tuning could compensate for the lens tuning i have done.
The question makes sense to me hope it does to you.
I think most folk with more than one long(ish) lens decide which one to take depending on what they are setting out to capture (with birds its probably how near they are likely to get to their target).This is my dilema, if i bought a 150-600 or 200-500 to go with my 300mm f4, i will know full well that neither of the zooms would match the 300mm f4 at 300mm, but then having the extra reach of the other lens, i'm sure that would be the one i would pick up as 9 times out of 10 i am wanting more reach
The way the AF on the v2 works (similar to live view AF on a dslr) means that no micro adjustment is needed with lenses.
I cannot say that I have ever heard a high pitched noise although my hearing is not brilliant these days.I asked this before, but nobody bothered to answer, so I'll ask again.
Does anybody elses 150-600 C make a high pitch whining noise when OS/IS is active?
Not sure if mine is faulty or not. IS seems to work fine, but I can hear a definite whine which occasionally gets quite loud.
I asked this before, but nobody bothered to answer, so I'll ask again.
Does anybody elses 150-600 C make a high pitch whining noise when OS/IS is active?
Not sure if mine is faulty or not. IS seems to work fine, but I can hear a definite whine which occasionally gets quite loud.
I can certainly see mine kick in Mike - have you set the OS to Dynamic?A little chatter on occasion but thats all,the unnerving thing is i cant see it kick in.
I can certainly see mine kick in Mike - have you set the OS to Dynamic?
That's why you cannot see it kick-in Mike. When you set the OS to Dynamic mode via the dock you will be able to see the OS working.I dont have the dock yet,the lens was second hand in the sense a guy returned it to the shop after a few days saying the OS wasn't working,well it is it just doesn't obviously kick in.
That's why you cannot see it kick-in Mike. When you set the OS to Dynamic mode via the dock you will be able to see the OS working.
Dynamic View Mode
This mode offers a recognizable OS effect to the image in the viewfinder. This helps to ensure the composition of images quickly.
I can assure that is incorrect as I have changed my stabilazing options on my 'C' . There were lots of early reports of things like this but as far as I can see the customization options of the 'C' are identical to the 'S'Confused now,looking at the sigma site it indicates stabilizing adjustments can only be made to the sport model.
I can assure that is incorrect as I have changed my stabilazing options on my 'C' . There were lots of early reports of things like this but as far as I can see the customization options of the 'C' are identical to the 'S'
I had a Canon 300mm f2.8 IS lens for several years so I can directly compare the images from both lenses. I often used it with a Canon 1.4x tc MkII or a Canon 2x tc MkII, with the 300/2.8 + 1.4x tc was superb and much better than the Sigma but you took a big hit when adding the 2x tc. In my experience you needed to stop down to f8 to get the best out of it. I certainly think the Sigma 150-600 C at 600mm f8 is better than the 300/2.8 IS Mk1 + 2x tc MKII plus the Sigma also focuses faster.So bare lens is always better than a lens with TC regardless how good this lens combined with TC?!!!
I have 300 2.8IS mk1, and i can use TC 1.4x or 2x, and you said even it will be faster than this Sigma 150-600 but Sigma wins down bare, how you compare say 150-600 @600mm with f6.3 or 7.1 to Canon 300 + 2x TC @600mm with f6.3 or 7.1? stopping down will not make them almost identical or similar in quality? some lenses are not that good at longest FL wide open.
A lot of my sample pics in this thread seem to have disappeared - something to do with photobucket I think, I will put a few back on for anyone that's interested in this lens. All these were taken at the full 600mm.
Nice egret captureJust getting used to my wildlife photography and my 150-600c Nikon D7200 set up, seems fine for what I need. This is my best photo far...
Little Egret by WillWA, on Flickr
It goes without saying that it takes better photos in good light (sunshine) but its getting to the point that I don't bother on overcast days because I can't seem to get the detail in photos. Is this just the limit of my gear or are there any tips you lot could share to improve my photography on your typical dull uk autumn day? Thanks