[Roy_Nikon]

Hi. Came to this thread a bit late.

I bought a 150-500 this summer after endless procrastination. I shoot a D700 and a D200. On balance I wish I'd procrastinated a bit longer and waited for Nikon to come up with something like the rumoured 100-500.

I am very unsure about this lens. Whenever I've done a tripod mounted comparison with my 70-200 VR1 plus TC1.7E I convince myself that the Sigma compares quite well. But nothing I've ever shot in anger looks much good to me - just something very unsatisfying about it, whereas the Nikon combo always looks a lot better than I expect given the TC. A combination of softness (I don't think it's really possible to hand hold this lens: the OS just isn't very good at all) lack of contrast and a general "deadness" about the images. On the D700 with th ISO cranked up for decent shutter speeds it produces some reasonable results, sometimes. The D200 - which I sometimes select for the range - gives horrible results. Obviously, as many people have noted, it's better below about 400 mm - but the 500 is what attracts us! It's battery-hungry too so when I have the battery grip on for extended shooting the weight is very very obtrusive.

I don't think that you can make a lens of this focal length range at the price this one sells for without heavily compromised performance. When I read it up prior to buying one many people were praising it. I think this is a case of whistling in the dark having shelled out quite a lot of cash and not being willing to admit disappointment.

I'm just going out to have another bash with it (new monopod) taking both bodies with me, despite previous experience.