sigma 50-500

I have one and love it

A bit heavy to start with, but can now do handheld, but often take monopod with me.

No bad points from me
 
I used to own one but found it a little heavy and needed cash so sold - lol, then re-bought a 150-500 just the other day!

Its a real cracker of a lens and I have a few hundred images on my flickr set (my flickr links in my sig).

Down sides

  • Needs lots of light (or a camera that can handle high ISO)
  • Heavy (but always used handheld with a RS Rapid for support)
  • Big (nicknamed mine "the overcompensator" as fully extended it looks like you're trying to intimidate a bull elephant!)
  • More expensive than the 150-500 OS

Ups

  • Incredible range
  • Very sharp
  • OS is outstanding
  • Full frame compatible

Hope that helps.
 
in short because loads of threads regards the 50-500 and the 150-500, superb lens, loads of happy customers.

Only problems I can see are if you arent the strongest they can be heavy, approx 3kg or so with a camera attached I think, cant say I pay too much attention.

Not the worlds fastest lens, but fantastic os.

I have the 150-500mm and think it is utterly superb, the 50-500 is meant to be easily on par or slightly sharper.

Great lens
 
Used to have a 150-500 (and before that a 170-500). Sold it to fund a 105 Macro. I found the 150-500 too heavy to cart around on the off chance it would get used. Probably didn't help that when I had it I was quite ill and the illness was sapping my strength to a large extent. Now I have a superzoom bridge camera and a D800 and 70-300 VR, I don't think I'll replace the 150-500 even though I now have the strength to carry it.

The newer version of the 50-500 has OS - not sure if the OP's is an OS or the older one. I think they are the same optically but IMO, OS does work very well so is worth the extra cost. The 150-500 is an improvement on the old 170-500 in the optical stakes and also has OS so can be used effectively as a hand held lens (the 170-500 was a little unwieldy and camera shake was hard to avoid). According to most reviews, the 50-500 is sharper than the 170 or 150 - 500s.
 
I think thats the thing, the weight will depend what you deem acceptable, I cart the 150-500mm around on race days for 10-12hours and it doesnt bother me too much as I put it down on the side during small periods to rest my shoulder but i do find it is always attached to one of my bodies even out on walks as i love having it around.

So guess its what the op thinks they may or may not need as it is a little on the extreme side for some uses. haha :)
 
I had the 150-500 for a few years, a cracking lens. As regards weight, if you think that's heavy wait until you upgrade to the 120-300 f2.8 with a 2X, which I now use for my birding. If it's your first time with this sort of lens then yes it does seem heavy at first but you soon get used to it.
 
I remember always wanting the 120-300 until I saw the weight, mind me asking if it's still handholdable?

By the way I forgot to mention that on my Flickr I have a set for the 150-500 too, although that's the one I had before which I think was a little softer (and much older) than the one I just got. I'll have to catch up a bit to get some of last weeks photos up.
 
Last edited:
No problems, just a cracking good lens (as was the 150-500 I had previously).
 
I would replace my 150-500 OS with the 50-500 OS as it's supposed top be sharper but the 150-500 I've got is excellent. I'd only replace it if I had plenty of spare cash though as I wouldn't dream of saving up a long time to replace such a great lens in the first place. When I bought it I had a FF and a crop body (5D2 and 7D) and had the Canon 100-400 L IS as well. I sold both the bodies to make up the outlay when I got a 5D3 and then decided I didn't need both lenses for one body.

After a lot of testing I decided to keep the 150-500 OS, the IQ difference, if any, was negligable, the AF speed was as good on both, the Sigma beat the Canon hands down on the OS/IS battle (I got a handheld shot of a waterfall at 1/10sec at 150mm) and the Sigma seemed faster and more accurate at acquiring the target when the light was failing.
 
Yes the 120-300 is handholdable (within reason) Keeping it to your eye for 20 mins might be a challenge, but I walk round the local nature reserve waving it about, utilising a monopod if I'm stationary watching a bird for a few minutes, mainly so that I don't have to bring it back up to my eye when I want to take a shot.
 
If it wasn't for the weight and my illness, I would have kept mine. Enjoy it!
 
Agreed with everyone, good call, you'll not regret it - and of course we want to see the shots!

Now where did I put those Sigma shares ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top