Sigma 150-500 Vs 70-200 f2.8 + x2 converter

biggles1979

biggles1979

Suspended / Banned
Messages
97
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,

I am in a bit of a dilemma on what to do and am trying to weigh up the pros and cons on what to go for.

I am wanting to get a tele for my Nikon D3100 and have been saving for the Sigma 150-500 f5-6.3 OS HSM - I am getting close to having enough (found one for just over £600) but have seen a few Sigma 70-200 f2.8 lenses which made me wonder if I would be better off getting one of these and a sigma 2x converter (which will keep the AF functioning).

Obviously I realize its a little shorter but can anyone with experience of these lenses or set-ups give any advice.

I think the 70-200 + 2x would give more flexibility (i.e. a 70-200 f2.8 and a 140-400 f5.6), better IQ (is it?) and be a bit faster (especially when used as the 70-200)

or, is the ability to get to 500mm worth it - I don't think i'm ever going to have the money to get anything bigger!

I have wanted the 150-500 for ages and now I am getting close to getting one I am wondering if I am getting the right thing - or if I need to consider other options. I have heard from others with the 150-500 that they are happy with it and I'm sure I would be but I wonder if I could get better for the same money.

Any advice you can give would be a real help.

Ian
 
depend what you want to shoot really ........ the 70-200 f2.8 is good for low light when not using TC. but like scott said the 150-500 is better than the 70-200 on TC.

If you don't use that length of focal that often then it make sense to get the 70-200 f2.8 with TC so you have the option to use the 70-200 f2.8 on its own for low light etc.
 
Can't comment on the actual lenses, however from my experience with a canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS (MKI) and 2xTC or even the 1.4xTC I haven't been overly impressed with the combinations. You lose 1 or 2 fstops depending which TC you use, autofocus speed is significantly hit with the 1.4x TC and 2x TC more on top, you also lose IQ's with the 2x TC and its very much more prone to hunting. I assume the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 and 2x TC would give similar performances.

In good light the 150-500mm will work as advertised, but as the light deteriorates, being a f6.3 lens that cheats the camera into thinking its a f5.6 that's where I think it will struggle significantly.

Both lenses + combinations will autofocus on your body. It depends what you want this lens to do?
 
with that focal i guess wild life maybe? or focal length to shoot far distance sports during good light condition?
 
pete.rush said:
being a f6.3 lens that cheats the camera into thinking its a f5.6 that's where I think it will struggle significantly.

Both lenses + combinations will autofocus on your body. It depends what you want this lens to do?
Click to expand...
thats only canon so it will af on non 1d series cams, nikon afs fine upto f8 on all bodys..
 
scottthehat said:
thats only canon so it will af on non 1d series cams, nikon afs fine upto f8 on all bodys..
Click to expand...

So there is a limit on Nikon's, every time this has been asked on the threads I've posted on, knowone really had a specific answer when it came to lenses for Nikon bodies. (F8 on all Nikon bodies like the 1D canon series)

Is it the same functionality, above f5.6 to f8 single focus point (centre) operation?

Thanks for clearing that up.
 
Hi guys, thanks for the replies my main targets will be wildlife and airshows. I know its not the fastest but it's the best I can afford.

Not sure what your all talking about with regards to the apature ranges not being true though...
 
Hi Ian I have the latter option and so far have found it to be ok. I ended up going this way when I traded my Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 DG Macro in as I wanted better image IQ and a better lens the reason for the conveter was because 200mm was not always going to be enough.
 
Zetec said:
Hi Ian I have the latter option and so far have found it to be ok. I ended up going this way when I traded my Sigma 70-300 F4-5.6 DG Macro in as I wanted better image IQ and a better lens the reason for the conveter was because 200mm was not always going to be enough.
Click to expand...

Would be interested to see some photos you have taken both with and without the 2x converter if you have any.

Am currently thinking of sticking with my original choice (150-500) but the low-light option of 70-200 f2.8 is very tempting as I can think of times I could use this as well as the tele. but a better IQ at 400mm (to compare the two) is the most important.

Ian
 
If you go to my profile and look for Colchester Zoo you will see some without the converter I am in the process of editing some that I took when I used the converter aswell.
 
I think the siggy is a great lens at the price, and in good light the speed is not much of an issue I have had good results shooting sport in all but very dull conditions, I have not used my 70-200 with a converter, but I sold my siggy and I don't miss it, but if any one took my 70-200 I would hit them with my F5.
 
At 400mm you will struggle without OS free hand. I have a canon 70-200 2.8 non I.s and although I could have gone with a tele it would have been hard to use free hand. I added the 150-500 to my line up and so glad I did, the OS is superb too.
 
I too shoot with a Sigma 150-500 and the auto focus is spot on, I mostly shoot manual focus but sometimes the shot demands auto and as said the OS system is spot on and I paid £815 for my lens through Amazon, so at the price you state its a bargain

Les :thumbs:
 
If the price really is just over £600, then it's quite likely that you're dealing with a Hong Kong supplier. Simply Electronics is an example - their current price for this lens is £649. That doesn't mean that they're dishonest, but you'll very probably have to wait some time for delivery. I bought my Sigma 150-500 from them, and it took over two weeks to arrive.
 
Can't remember the site that listed it but they are listing it as being in stock and they were UK based, have seen it for a bit more on another site I have used and they delivered within few days - but if I'm saving that much I am prepared to wait.
Although having said that I went out today and found some kingfishers... now I want this lens even more! My 250 just couldn't get close enough. It will take some practice to be able to keep up with them in flight though.
 
Trying to remember the place my Sigma 150-500 came from, but paid £650 including delivery IIRC. I'll dig out the invoice tomorrow and let you know where it was. Took a just few days to arrive.

The lens is a heavy old lump. It takes some lugging around. But it seems well built and the weight reinforces that impression. The AF is nice, quite quick, but rather noisy. The image stabilisation seems good from what I can tell.
 
I also have the Sigma 150-500, and cannot fault it at its price.
I paid £750 for mine 10 months ago, just before the price went up by a extra £100.
So, at £600, I presume it will be a import and not a official UK lens.
One point worth noting, you will get a extended 3 year warranty direct from Sigma if it is a offical UK lens, all you have to do is fill in a online form with the serial number.
 
I have just bought the sigma 150-500 from one stop digital for a little over £600 arrived in two days! I can fault it, you will need a good tripod if you are going to use it for long periods, it will struggle in low light levels! But the extra reach has meant I've not touched my 70-300 vr lens for sometime now.
All in all a good lens and well worth it when you look at the price of the Nikon equivalent.
 
Spotted this thread and thought I'd ask a question. I have the 70-200 2.8 with 2x tele converter. However, I'm also weighing up the idea of the 150-500 for wildlife. Is it worth having both?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top