Bigma vs Son-of-Bigma really can't decide.......

[kalibre]

Hi,

Looking to get into the 500mm realm and have narrowed it down to the 'new' Sigma 150-500 DG HSM OS f/5-6.3 or the good old 50-500 EX DG f/4-6.3. But I keep switching between the two in my head.

This is what I'm thinking:

1) The extra range 50-150 would be handy from the Bigma, although it's not the primary reason I'd be getting the lens. It's always nice to avoid lens swapping if I am carrying it around on holiday for example.

2) Neither of these are fast lenses, so I'm thinking that the OS in the 150 may be a great feature (surely not the 4-stops it's rumoured to be though!?), especially as I much prefer to hand-hold were possible.

3) Weight/Size doesn't bother me at all. (I know the 150-500 is a monster.)

4) The lack of EX on the 150-500 is purely because of new Sigma naming conventions, so not bothered about that.

5) I'm thinking that AF on the new lens should be quicker than the bigma because of the HSM. Any know if this is true?

Other than that I know it's a personal choice base don shooting style, but i'd still really be interested to hear from anyone with experience of these lenses or even both!

Cheers in advance.

 

[eyespy]

Hi,

Looking to get into the 500mm realm and have narrowed it down to the 'new' Sigma 150-500 DG HSM OS f/5-6.3 or the good old 50-500 EX DG f/4-6.3. But I keep switching between the two in my head.

This is what I'm thinking:

1) The extra range 50-150 would be handy from the Bigma, although it's not the primary reason I'd be getting the lens. It's always nice to avoid lens swapping if I am carrying it around on holiday for example.
Yep - extra range very handy.

2) Neither of these are fast lenses, so I'm thinking that the OS in the 150 may be a great feature (surely not the 4-stops it's rumoured to be though!?), especially as I much prefer to hand-hold were possible.
OS is a big + point for the 150-500.

3) Weight/Size doesn't bother me at all. (I know the 150-500 is a monster.)
1910g - about 70g heavier than the 50-500 - they're both heavy buggers.

4) The lack of EX on the 150-500 is purely because of new Sigma naming conventions, so not bothered about that.
Actually Sigma say: "The exterior of this lens is EX-finished to denote the superior build and optical quality, and to enhance its appearance."

5) I'm thinking that AF on the new lens should be quicker than the bigma because of the HSM. Any know if this is true?
The Bigma is HSM in all mounts apart from Sony and Pentax.

Other than that I know it's a personal choice base don shooting style, but i'd still really be interested to hear from anyone with experience of these lenses or even both!
I have a Bigma which is permanently attached to a monopod/ballhead. It's not the easiest of lenses to handhold or carry for any length of time and with a monopod I can just sling it over my shoulder while walking.
If you don't want to use a monopod I think you would be better off with the 150-500 because of the OS

 

[Marc]

I have the Bigma and it is used on a Monopod, although I was at a polo tournament last month where the rain was torrential and I had to shelter unter a parasol on the decking outside the clubhouse. Unfortunately the monopod was slipping on the wet decking, so I had to hand hold. It did surprisingly well but, assuming that OS is Sigma's version of image stabilization, I use Sony which has it built in.

 

[kalibre]

Cheers peeps.

 

[ppp]

From reviews I have read the 50-500 seems to be a better lens with the OS on the new 150 not actually being that much of a help, test pics I saw showed that even with the OS on the 150 produced marginally worse shots

 

[susie]

I've never used the 150-500, but I did have the 50-500 for a while and although you do need to use it on a tripod ot monopod I did manage to use it handheld a few times and the pics came out (for me) well with it.
Do you know anyone or anywhere you could try one?