sigma 50-150 F/2.8 OS HSM?!
- Thread starter lucky_13
- Start date
Review here, looks decent:
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/322...sm-dc-nikon-mount-review--test-report?start=2
http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/322...sm-dc-nikon-mount-review--test-report?start=2
ermmm...... not discontinued! Even has the new finish.
http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/dclenses/50-150mmOS.htm
http://www.sigma-imaging-uk.com/lenses/dclenses/50-150mmOS.htm
OP
- Messages
- 624
- Name
- Billy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
DaveKing said:
That's a bit steep! have a look at panamoz it's £593
I'm ready to order for that price but not sure if it's gonna be any good as not many reviews out there apart from froknowsphoto and it doesn't seem a very complex review to compare against other lenses where they give u the good the bad and the ugly of every lens.
Last edited:
The OS version is pointless. 3 times the price of the non-os, twice the weight and much longer.
The non OS was a really really great lens and very cheap for what it was. I had one when I used Nikon. Unless you absolutely need OS I would look for a s/h 50-150, you can get one for 300£ and it is fantastic.
I needed OS so I now have K-5+50-135 which is even better than sigma but only just. Sigma still beats it on AF speed by quite a bit.
The non OS was a really really great lens and very cheap for what it was. I had one when I used Nikon. Unless you absolutely need OS I would look for a s/h 50-150, you can get one for 300£ and it is fantastic.
I needed OS so I now have K-5+50-135 which is even better than sigma but only just. Sigma still beats it on AF speed by quite a bit.
They crop up in the classifieds from time to time
OP
- Messages
- 624
- Name
- Billy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
so if u think os is pointless how come u bought os?
Sorry I did not make myself clear, I meant the OS version of the 50-150 is pointless. I think OS / VR / VC / IS or whatever you want to call image stabilisation is invaluable. One of the main reasons I changed systems because I wanted all my lenses to be stabilised and without having to pay a premium in money and size/weight to get it. My 50-135 is half the weight of the 50-150 OS and half the price, yet it is stabilised and absolutely superb optically.
The 50-150 non OS is a real alternative to the massive expensive 70-200 out there. It was much smaller, much cheaper and optically really good. The 50-150 OS is near the size weight and price of a 70-200 VRI/IS MK1 . Why would you go with it instead of one of the 70-200?
The 50-150 non OS is a real alternative to the massive expensive 70-200 out there. It was much smaller, much cheaper and optically really good. The 50-150 OS is near the size weight and price of a 70-200 VRI/IS MK1 . Why would you go with it instead of one of the 70-200?
OP
- Messages
- 624
- Name
- Billy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
vrapan said:
True, price I guess, I know it's being advertised for £1000 but it can be had for under £600 and that's not too bad if the lens is any good! Some sample images I've seen from froknowsphoto aren't that impressive, for on extra £100 you can get the Canon 70-200 F/4L IS USM and if the siggy isn't up there with the canon than ur right it's no point in getting that. I dunno much about Pentax or Sony but I hear they'r body's have built in IS, something other manufacturers should consider too.
- Messages
- 3,652
- Name
- Andy
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I actually inquired about this lens at the Sigma stand at Focus on Imaging exhibition and was told they didn't know when it would be released as it was still in development. Strange that it's in the shops a few weeks later or maybe even at the time and they didn't know. 
Anyway I'll be looking into this one as it will make a great lens along side the 120-300 and the new coatings they come in seem much better than the old Sigma peel off type.
Anyway I'll be looking into this one as it will make a great lens along side the 120-300 and the new coatings they come in seem much better than the old Sigma peel off type.