Sigma 150-600 S vs C

if your into Motorsports like me C, the S is far too heavy to cart around the track all day.
If you really want it to be super sharp, buy the dock and get Focal Pro and fine tune it, I did mine and its as good as it gets in my book. The Nikon 200-500 is a cracker but you cant use that, but it also weighs the same as the S and for track humping that's a no no, i feel the S is more wildlife Birding and the C a more run around lens... The S is known to be sharper at 600mm but if you tune the C is near as can be, and to be honest when I'm shooting at the track I'm normally between 250 to 500 range, hence why I'm eyeing up the Nikkor 80-400 :P
 
I think for motorsports it's an ideal lens, that's why I bought mine [emoji3]
 
from the results I've seen online it seems a very good lens,(sigma)I'm surprised the Nikon 200-500 is not more expensive,has anyone had or tried one of those in comparison to the Sigmas?
 
The one factor that a lot of peeps don't take into account is athmospherics ,,so you got a 600mm lens and that shot that was to far away is now larger in the frame ,but it's still really to far away as heat haze etc will make your shot blurry , the one thing I had to instill in myself after going from a 400 to a 600 lens was to stay at the same distance as the 400 and fill the frame more .
Also again talking from experience I think but can't prove that the lenses work better with larger sensors I.e 1.3 or full frame or maybe it's because the cameras are better initially .
As for the sport being to heavy to lug round all day that's piffle ,if you use a black rapid strap and get the lens C of G correct ( depends on camera weight) then you can walk round all day with it ,I often do and I,m well into my 70's
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top