Sigma 50-500mm v Sigma 150-500mm

[wizzo]

I'm considering buying a long zoom and have looked at both the 50-500 and 150-500 Sigma's. I've noticed that the old 'Bigma' is classed as an EX lens, which I understand is short for excellent? The newer 150-500mm is missing this lettering, however. Now the obvious thing would be, to pop into Jessop's or Jacob's - or so you would have thought? I'd have been better off asking in B&Q! Do any of you guys have any idea if the newer lens is of a lesser quality? Also, I'm torn between one of these Sigma lenses and Nikon's own 70-200 f2.8 with a converter. Basically, I want some one to make the decision for me

[NJP87]

From what i have read the 50-500mm seems to have slightly better image quailty that the 150-500, but it doesn't have the OS so handheld shots would be rather difficult.

The Nikon 70-200 is a great lens on it's own but the quality would probably be on par with the others with a converter and it's pricey at nearly 2K for the new one.

Does it have to be a zoom?

[crieffy]

I can't comment on the 70-200 and teleconverter option, but I've owned the 50-500mm and currently have the 150-500mm. I'd say there's nothing in it when it comes to build quality, and I can't see any difference with image quality either.

The OS feature of the 150-500 is a definite bonus for hand held shots and has probably enabled me to get a few photos that would have been impossible with the 50-500. It was the OS that swung it for me, as f6.3 (at best) and available light here in Shetland is generally lacking

I think either of them would be hard to beat for the money.

John

[wizzo]

Thanks guys! Regarding a zoom. Well, from a practical point of view, I thought it would be easier than moving towards an easily spooked creature. However, I can see the merits in learning fieldcraft to get closer to your subject, so yes, maybe a prime lens would be worth consideration. Of course, price is also a big consideration I guess. You've convinced me that these are great lenses - so thanks again.




So Many Questions - So Little Time!

[NJP87]

They are great lenses and i have seen some superb images from the bigma.

I would also take a look at the Nikon 300mm f4 if your considering a prime, i have the older AF version and it's a great lens and works very well with the 1.4TC, you can pick them up for around £400 for the older one and £800-900 for the newer AF-S.

[wizzo]

Thanks again - I'm gonna check that option out tomorrow. This forum is fantastic!

[DrNickBurton]

As I mentioned in another thread recently, Jessops are currently selling the Sigma 100-300mm f4 for a ridiculously low price (£599, vs £1150 at Warehouse express and the like). If I didn't have one already, I'd be all over this!

I used to have the 150-500mm OS. The OS on that lens is really excellent, if a little loud (makes strange whirring noise)! Bear in mind also that it's a VERY heavy lens. Not the sort of thing you can carry around all day without getting sore arms.

I briefly had both the 100-300mm and the 150-500mm, but on comparing images from these two lenses, I decided to sell the 150-500mm. The 100-300mm wide open is better than the 150-500mm stopped down, at any of the overlapping focal lengths. It's not even a fair fight. Put a 1.4 TC on the 100-300mm and it's still a clear winner.

The Nikkor 70-200mm should be better still, but I'm not sure 200mm at the long end will be quite long enough for you, even with a 1.4 TC. On the other hand, there should be plenty of cheap second hand copies on ebay come November, when the upgraded version is released.

And then of course there's always the Nikkor 80-400mm.

Choices, choices!

[Richard G.]

As an owner of the Nikon 70-200mm, 1.4 TCII and Sigma 150-500mm, my view is that there is absolutely no comparison between the Sigma and the Nikon. The Nikon is a fantastic lens and still vastly superior even with TC. The only issue you have, as mentioned above is the reach, but I don't regret buying it for second, it really depends what you want to do with it?

To be honest, it also has a very good reputation, so if/when people upgrade to the new version later in the year, I can see the used ones selling pretty well and commanding a high used price.

There's also a bit of a rumour about a Nikon 100-500mm f4-5.6 possibly coming next year, if you think it's worth waiting that long on a rumour? If it does turn up, I'd probably buy this lens unseen and stick the Sigma on Ebay the next day.

[John D]

Originally Posted by DrNickBurton

As I mentioned in another thread recently, Jessops are currently selling the Sigma 100-300mm f4 for a ridiculously low price (£599, vs £1150 at Warehouse express and the like). If I didn't have one already, I'd be all over this!

I used to have the 150-500mm OS. The OS on that lens is really excellent, if a little loud (makes strange whirring noise)! Bear in mind also that it's a VERY heavy lens. Not the sort of thing you can carry around all day without getting sore arms.

I briefly had both the 100-300mm and the 150-500mm, but on comparing images from these two lenses, I decided to sell the 150-500mm. The 100-300mm wide open is better than the 150-500mm stopped down, at any of the overlapping focal lengths. It's not even a fair fight. Put a 1.4 TC on the 100-300mm and it's still a clear winner.

The Nikkor 70-200mm should be better still, but I'm not sure 200mm at the long end will be quite long enough for you, even with a 1.4 TC. On the other hand, there should be plenty of cheap second hand copies on ebay come November, when the upgraded version is released.

And then of course there's always the Nikkor 80-400mm.

Choices, choices!

I also use a Sigma EX 100-300mm F4 lens and EX 1.4tc for wildlife/bird photography and can highly recommend this combination.

John D

Zenfolio | John D's Wild World

[wizzo]

Thanks Nick, Richard and John. Oh to win the lottery! Then again, wouldn't be half as much fun deciding lol