Thoughts on Sigma 150-500mm f5-6.3

Skynet-T800 · 9 Jun 2012 at 10:14

Hi there been thinking of a lens with a bit of reach and this one springs to mind, mainly for wildlife & sport also astrophotography will be used on my D700 & J1 for moon shots

But is it any good, can't seem to find reviews on it.

looking at the drawbacks on it is the variable aperture and the sweet spot of the lens is about F11 so possibility of shutter speed loss unless ISO is ramped up.

I guess the weight but will be used with tri/monopod.

The price is good for what it is but if it's no good then it's not worth it.

I will be looking to get the 70-200 at the end of the year hopefully, this couple with a teleconverter would this return better results at the long end?

Cheers

martynpd · 9 Jun 2012 at 10:51

id get a 70-200 with a teleconverter if its a canon or nikon. 1.4x will give you f4 2x will give you f5.6

200 * 2 = 400 FX / full frame
200 * 2 * 1.5 (or1.6 if canon) = 600 cropped. or 640 on canon

This will give you better results I think.

D700 are cool at 3200 iso anything higher gives annoying noise f11 in low light will need a lot of iso, but you can always put negative compensation on it to increase the shutter speed or positibe to lighten it up.

fozzybear · 9 Jun 2012 at 11:13

Image examples here.

It looks like a good value lens to me. Obviously you'll probably find yourself bumping up the ISO on dull days. It shouldn't be a problem on your D700 though.

martynpd · 9 Jun 2012 at 11:14

I forgot to mention cost wise the teleconverters are like 300-400pounds each, so its expensive, buy the lens of a rainforest site, try it and DSR it back?!

Rojin · 9 Jun 2012 at 12:07

I think it's a good value lens, the OS works well and mine was good at f8. I've gone down the route of using a 70-200 with a 2x TC, but I haven't shot enough to know if it is comparable. I am just using a cheap £78 TC at the moment though

If I had the luxury I would've probably kept the 150-500, but I had to finance the 70-200 f2.8 mkII somehow!

A few 150-500 examples:

RIAT 2011 by jj_glos, on Flickr

RIAT 2011 - A10 by jj_glos, on Flickr

rexehuk · 9 Jun 2012 at 12:07

Third A10 picture is awesome... So makes me want to fire up DCS A10-C

Columbo · 9 Jun 2012 at 12:33

I've been seriously thinking about getting the 150-500mm for a few weeks now for wildlife.

I shoot at f8 most of the time so I'm not worried about how sharp it is wide open, however where I'm not sure is whether its going to be usable hand held at 500mm.

Any thoughts?

Ksanti · 9 Jun 2012 at 13:21

ManCuBuS said:
I've been seriously thinking about getting the 150-500mm for a few weeks now for wildlife.

I shoot at f8 most of the time so I'm not worried about how sharp it is wide open, however where I'm not sure is whether its going to be usable hand held at 500mm.

Any thoughts?

It depends entirely on the light. The OS system is far better than say the Canon 100-400L's, so there's not really another option if you can't handhold the Siggy at 500 other than supporting it or working on your handholding technique

fozzybear · 9 Jun 2012 at 13:38

Another option could be the Sigma 120-400mm f/4.5-5.6 DG OS HSM. Slightly faster but obviously not as much reach as the 150-500. Again, it's a reasonable buy at £649.

D.P. · 9 Jun 2012 at 15:51

Of these types of enses te only one I have heard that was reasonably good was the 50-500, the others tend not to give critical sharpness even stopped down.Here is a review of the 150-500

http://www.bythom.com/sigma-150-500mm-lens-review.htm

Tripod a must, 500mm is just not critically sharp.

Rojin · 9 Jun 2012 at 15:55

ManCuBuS said:
I've been seriously thinking about getting the 150-500mm for a few weeks now for wildlife.

I shoot at f8 most of the time so I'm not worried about how sharp it is wide open, however where I'm not sure is whether its going to be usable hand held at 500mm.

Any thoughts?

The only time mine was on a tripod was for the obligatory moon shot that you have to take when you've bought a new long lens!

Moon by jj_glos, on Flickr

Other than that I always hand held it, I didn't find it particularly heavy and the OS is pretty decent. As with all long lenses, if it's windy they do catch the wind a lot which makes smooth panning difficult!

Duck by jj_glos, on Flickr

Blue *** by jj_glos, on Flickr

RIAT 2011RI by jj_glos, on Flickr

Columbo · 9 Jun 2012 at 16:51

Cheers Roj, I think you've made mind up tbh.

I've got some shares coming through at the end of this month so I thought I'd treat myself to something when they get paid out and looks like this will be it.

Also mate fekkin stunning shots, absolutely love the last aircraft one. Any chance of a 1680x1050 wallpaper?

Tysonator · 9 Jun 2012 at 17:23

Rojin said:
I think it's a good value lens, the OS works well and mine was good at f8. I've gone down the route of using a 70-200 with a 2x TC, but I haven't shot enough to know if it is comparable. I am just using a cheap £78 TC at the moment though

If I had the luxury I would've probably kept the 150-500, but I had to finance the 70-200 f2.8 mkII somehow!

A few 150-500 examples:

RIAT 2011 by jj_glos, on Flickr

RIAT 2011 by jj_glos, on Flickr

RIAT 2011 by jj_glos, on Flickr

RIAT 2011 - A10 by jj_glos, on Flickr

The first pic of the A10 is great, when I saw the last pic of the A10 it is just amazing !

Good shot !