Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3 DG OS HSM

Jelster

Jelster

Suspended / Banned
Messages
9,986
Name
Steve
Edit My Images
Yes
Does anybody here have this lens ?

I was considering the Canon 100-400 L but thought I'd investigate this lens as it will give me an extra 100mm. It will be used on my 7D, mainly birds and other wildlife, and maybe a bit of motorsport.

Any reviews or links to images would be appreciated.

Cheers,
Steve
 
I have one. In my flickr the latest set from Barnes are using it, especially the Little Grebe ones. Its a good lens and the OS is very effective. However you do need good light to use it.

I am sure someone will be along to tell you that the Canon is better though! ;)

The siggy is a billy bargain for the price, especially second hand.
 
Superb lens, had mine for a couple of years now, and reasonable with the 1.4 and 2X TC's as well, although you need good light for the 2X.

500mm
http://SPAM/c3whur/Birds/Img_5951c.jpg

with 1.4
http://SPAM/c3whur/Birds/Img_1975.jpg

with 2X cropped
IMG_3310.jpg
 
Thanks for the response guys. I "know" that the Canon 100-400 will be better quality and most probably sharper wide open @ 400mm, but that extra length keeps tempting me, and the photo's you've posted prove that it can be quite sharp.

I will have to have a serious think now. I really like having some form of IS, so the 400 f5.6 is out of the picture, although the 300 f4 IS & 1.4 converter is an option, all be it an expensive one. And it still only gets me to 420mm.

Steve
 
The 400mm f/5.6 prime actually resolves more details than the various sigmas do at 500mm.

This is a comparison someone I know online did a while ago. Note it is actually the sharper 50-500 zoom he compares it to. The sigma is at 500mm (but doesn't appear to be any tighter? The guy did the test properly, they were taken on a tripod at exactly the same distance)
http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/archive/showphoto.php/photo/69532

And here is the siggy at 500mm vs the 300 f/4 x1.4 (which delivers roughly the same IQ as the 100-400).
http://www.wildaboutbritain.co.uk/archive/showphoto.php/photo/72001


I hold the sigma lenses in high regard, but after viewing those comparisons, I would not buy them for the sole reason of having an extra 100mm ;). The guy who did the test actually sold both the 400 prime and the 300 prime at various times to raise needed cash, but kept his 50-500 because he liked the versatility.

The sigma's offer superb value and extreme versatility in the case of the 50-500, but I think if you can afford it, the 100-400 is a better choice. It's OS is a little more effective though, but the canon is also lighter and smaller (though the push/pull zoom isn't to everyone's taste).
 
Last edited:
The Sigma 150-500 has an awesome OS system, better than the Canon 100-400, just been outside to take this with the 2X
Not too shabby at 250,000 miles :D

IMG_3853.jpg
 
Oops, my post was misstyped, I meant the 150-500 has a little more effective OS system.
Maybe up to 3 stops, compared with the canon that's about 2 stops.
 
Mine arrived this morning funnily enough. First thought when I opened the lens bag and took it out was ... "what a monster!"

It is for my Canon 500D, that I was half thinking of changing for a 7D. On clicking away in the garden today on a really dull day, I'm thrilled with the clarity, and ease of use. All I need to do now is go and give my arm and shoulder a rest and I was hand-holding. Makes the camera appear quite insignificant, so I thought.

Biggest I have had so far is the 55-250; it makes that look soooo tiny. Very pleased this far. Mine was mint used once with a Sigma filter thrown in all for £600 so I figured it was a good deal with the remaining warranty as well.

Very pleased thus far.

Mike
 
Is there anything better for £750 than the Sigma?
 
Jelster said:
Thanks for the response guys. I "know" that the Canon 100-400 will be better quality and most probably sharper wide open @ 400mm, but that extra length keeps tempting me, and the photo's you've posted prove that it can be quite sharp.

I will have to have a serious think now. I really like having some form of IS, so the 400 f5.6 is out of the picture, although the 300 f4 IS & 1.4 converter is an option, all be it an expensive one. And it still only gets me to 420mm.

Steve
Click to expand...

Some great captures in those examples but I think I'd be after the ratio of keepers it gives.
 
Martyarty uses this combo to great effect in the bird forum.

Have a search under his name.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top