Sigma OS 50-500 vs 150-500 vs 80-400 vs 120-400

Yes, it seems Sigma offer a ridiculous selection of lenses in very similar focal lengths.

I'm interested in Sigma OS telezooms going to at least 400mm, preferably 500mm. I intend for them to be used on the D800, except mostly in DX-crop mode.

I only have experience of the Bigma 50-500mm (non-OS version) and thought it delivered decent IQ (tho' my camera at the time was a 4mp D2H). It didn't really go to 500mm...more like 450mm or 470mm. But the IQ and focussing was not bad at all, better than I expected anyway.

But it's massive and heavy. What are the other 3 options like?

Sigma OS 150-500mm
vs
Sigma OS 80-400mm
vs
Sigma OS 120-400mm

I don't need the wider-angle focal lengths, I need the reach. Most important factor is:

good IQ even wide-open at the tele-end, with reliable focussing.

Any other suggestions of an AF zoom lens going to at least 400mm with stabiliser function? Price has to be similar to these lenses (so unfortunately no Nikkor 200-400mm).

Thanks.

I've been reading a lot about these lenses today and the consensus seems to be to go for the 150-500 but a few voices said a 300/4 with a TC gives better IQ..
--
Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8189967@N04/

Chas P said:

I've been reading a lot about these lenses today and the consensus seems to be to go for the 150-500 but a few voices said a 300/4 with a TC gives better IQ..

Click to expand...

I would sacrifice IQ for stabilisation, auto-focus and zoom-flexibility. For me in terms of what I want to do with such a lens (wildlife, candid people/reportage) it's all about getting the shot you need, rather than it being about ultimate IQ.

The 50-500 OS seems to be well reviewed... I can't afford one, but if I could I would get it.

I am currently using 100-300/4 + 1.4x TC when I need extra reach. IQ is quite good throughout the range for distance focusing (shots within about 8m at 300mm f/4 degrade slightly, but stopping down for these shots helps immensely (and when you are shooting small things that close you generally want to stop down for DOF anyway). I find this to give IQ at 300mm and beyond around 8m distance to be pretty much on par with 300/4 AF (which I also had, but sold), with the added bonus of being able to zoom to the wide end when you are too close. Focus without the TC is lightning fast, and with the TC it is decently fast (about the same as my 18-105).

It does not have OS (a distinct disadvantage), and is about the same size / weight as the 50-500, but I don't think you are going to get much better in a smaller package unless you go to a 70-300mm zoom...

Hope this helped a bit.

dholl said:

Yes, it seems Sigma offer a ridiculous selection of lenses in very similar focal lengths.

I'm interested in Sigma OS telezooms going to at least 400mm, preferably 500mm. I intend for them to be used on the D800, except mostly in DX-crop mode.

I only have experience of the Bigma 50-500mm (non-OS version) and thought it delivered decent IQ (tho' my camera at the time was a 4mp D2H). It didn't really go to 500mm...more like 450mm or 470mm. But the IQ and focussing was not bad at all, better than I expected anyway.

But it's massive and heavy. What are the other 3 options like?

Sigma OS 150-500mm
vs
Sigma OS 80-400mm
vs
Sigma OS 120-400mm

I don't need the wider-angle focal lengths, I need the reach. Most important factor is:

good IQ even wide-open at the tele-end, with reliable focussing.

Any other suggestions of an AF zoom lens going to at least 400mm with stabiliser function? Price has to be similar to these lenses (so unfortunately no Nikkor 200-400mm).

Thanks.

Click to expand...

--
--Wyatt
http://photos.digitalcave.ca
All images (c) unless otherwise specified, please ask me before editing.

Sigma 50-500 OS is around 450mm closer in, though it acts more like 500mm at distance. This lens is sharper than the Sigma 150-500 OS wide open, but they get to about the same sharpness at about f/9. There have been some sporadic reports of the OS working better in the Sigma 50-500 OS than in the Sigma 150-500 OS, but that was several years ago, so it may just have been a QA issue that has been resolved.

The Sigma 150-500 OS is considered better for shooting longer distances at f/9 or f/10. This lens is not as sharp at the Sigma 50-500 Os wide open, but closes the gap for about equal sharpness around f/9 to f/10. This lens has a moderate amount of focus breathing (maybe 470mm very close in), but not as bad as the Sigma 50-500 OS. This lens is about $600 cheaper than the Sigma 50-500 OS.

The Sigma 140-400 is smaller and lighter than the other two, but it is only 400mm as well. I do not see the reason to buy this lens over the others.
--
Catallaxy

dholl said:

Yes, it seems Sigma offer a ridiculous selection of lenses in very similar focal lengths.

I'm interested in Sigma OS telezooms going to at least 400mm, preferably 500mm. I intend for them to be used on the D800, except mostly in DX-crop mode.

I only have experience of the Bigma 50-500mm (non-OS version) and thought it delivered decent IQ (tho' my camera at the time was a 4mp D2H). It didn't really go to 500mm...more like 450mm or 470mm. But the IQ and focussing was not bad at all, better than I expected anyway.

But it's massive and heavy. What are the other 3 options like?

Sigma OS 150-500mm
vs
Sigma OS 80-400mm
vs
Sigma OS 120-400mm

I don't need the wider-angle focal lengths, I need the reach. Most important factor is:

good IQ even wide-open at the tele-end, with reliable focussing.

Any other suggestions of an AF zoom lens going to at least 400mm with stabiliser function? Price has to be similar to these lenses (so unfortunately no Nikkor 200-400mm).

Thanks.

Click to expand...

Good wide open at the tele end? Not going to happen at these price points, I'm afraid. Several of these lenses are great wide open in their mid-range, but none are prime-quality wide open at the long end.

I own the 150-500 OS, and love it. It's great up to about 350mm even wide open. But I have to stop it down to F/9 or so at 500mm to get good results. Even then, it's good mostly at longer distances, and at very close distances (not middle distances).

Sigma apparently figured out that people were reviewing their lenses at test chart distances, and appears to have "fixed" the issue with the 50-500 OS, which tests well at test chart distances, from reviews I have seen.

If you've got the money, get the 50-500 OS. The OS is the best of the bunch (about 3 stops vs 2 for the 150-500 OS), and they kept the IQ good while extending the range to a 10x zoom. 50mm at the wide end is infinitely more useful than 150mm, IMO. They even improved the mid-distance IQ at 500mm as well. You thus (IMO) get good value for your 60% increase in price vs the 150-500 OS.

I use my 150-500 OS primarily as as an airshow lens. Most of the airshows I go to are usually over tarmac/concrete on a sunny day. This causes the limiting factor for IQ to be the air (thermal distortion). The sun means the F/9 aperture isn't a huge big deal, meaning I get shots with it that aren't that much worse than a 500mm prime, while being able to handhold-shoot it all day long (not easy to do with a Nikon 500mm!)

IMO, the 150-500 OS's F/6.3 at 500mm is mostly for high ISO situations. Occasionally I really can use 500mm in darker situations, and the ISO climbs up to extreme levels. At high ISO on my D7000, lowering the ISO one stop makes a big difference in IQ, and more than offsets the IQ loss from the wide open aperture. For me, above ISO 200, I'll shoot wide open. Under that, I'll stop it down to F/9. The nice thing about this is that F/6.3 is only about 1.3 stops worse than a 500mm F/4 prime, so the prime at ISO 2000+ (on a D7000) won't give you that much better than the Sigma wide open, due to high-ISO degradation.

For the price, any of these Sigmas are a good deal. Just don't expect prime-quality images from these lenses, unless you stop down. The big advantage of the primes is the ability to shoot wide open at F/4 (or F/2.8 for the 400's) with exceptional IQ, which is very useful (with the tradeoff of price, weight and bulk).

Here are some pictures at 500mm from my 150-500 (I got a good copy btw):

Thanks for the input, everyone. Sounds like the best of the Sigmas is the one I already have experience with (and I also agree the 50-500mm is a very good lens).

I've just by chance discovered there might be a Nikkor option after all: the 80-400mm

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=115&sort=7&cat=28&page=2

I'll ploúgh through the user reviews, but would anyone here forsake 100mm for Nikkor quality? Or is this lens not necessarily superior to the Sigma?

I must admit I tend to believe that the shorter the zoom range, the better quality it will be. Not as a hard-and-fast rule, but generally. Just like how a fixed aperture generally means a zoom lens is a higher quality (the f2.8 zooms for example).

The Nikkor being only a 5x zoom as opposed to a 10x zoom may mean it has more consistent IQ throughtout the range.

The Nikon 80-400 has better IQ than the Bigma, but lacks AFS which makes it way too slow for birds and aircraft in flight. Fine for static subjects though.

I have had the 80-400vr, 50-500 and my wife is currently using the 50-500 OS which I bought after testing the 150-500 as well. I would suggest you seriously consider the Nikkor 300 f/4 with converters or the 70-200vr2 with TC20EIII instead.
--
http://kennekam.blogspot.com/
http://www.pbase.com/kennekam

I like the Nikon 80-400 VR a lot but I wouldn't choose it over the Sigma 50-500 OS unless I needed the slightly smaller size of the Nikkor. I've owned and used both extensively.

The big Sigma surpasses the Nikon in stabilisation, AF efficacy (the HSM won't hunt as long and far as the screw-driven lens when acquiring or re-acquiring a subject), and close range focus ability. Don't underestimate the last attribute - its an important one and the reason I now no longer have an AF-S 300/f4. The Sigma replaced both Nikon lenses for me.

Don't shoot any of the super tele-zooms wide open unless necessary. They all show a noticeable improvement stopped down 2/3-1 stop.

--
Holmes
http://holmes.zenfolio.com/

Simply buy a Nikon 300 f/4 AFS (+TC1.4EII) if you want a real exotic, that's all....

dholl said:

Yes, it seems Sigma offer a ridiculous selection of lenses in very similar focal lengths.

I'm interested in Sigma OS telezooms going to at least 400mm, preferably 500mm. I intend for them to be used on the D800, except mostly in DX-crop mode.

I only have experience of the Bigma 50-500mm (non-OS version) and thought it delivered decent IQ (tho' my camera at the time was a 4mp D2H). It didn't really go to 500mm...more like 450mm or 470mm. But the IQ and focussing was not bad at all, better than I expected anyway.

But it's massive and heavy. What are the other 3 options like?

Sigma OS 150-500mm
vs
Sigma OS 80-400mm
vs
Sigma OS 120-400mm

I don't need the wider-angle focal lengths, I need the reach. Most important factor is:

good IQ even wide-open at the tele-end, with reliable focussing.

Any other suggestions of an AF zoom lens going to at least 400mm with stabiliser function? Price has to be similar to these lenses (so unfortunately no Nikkor 200-400mm).

Thanks.

Click to expand...

I have used them all. I owned the 80-400mm nikkor, the 50-500mm non OS and the 150-500mm OS, and now I own the 50-500mm OS.

The 50-500mm OS is awesome, the sharpest of all you are comparing, non par.

The only one that comes close is the 120-400mm OS sigma. I do not own this but I used it and compared it.

--
http://www.photoexpedition.net
http://www.fotoclubhonduras.com

Thanks again, guys.

I think it will be the Bigma again, this time I'll get the OS version. As long as the IQ is at least the same as the non-OS. The non-OS I had really was quite decent. Here's some DH2 images (I think they were mostly wide-open):

Some comparisons:

300 mm, fully dilated:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=374&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=651&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

500 mm, fully dilated:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=374&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=651&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

Cenk said:

Some comparisons:

Click to expand...

Cenk said:

500 mm, fully dilated:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=374&Camera=9&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=1&LensComp=651&CameraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

Click to expand...

That's really useful...bookmarked.

The 50-500 does indeed compare favorably.

ye gods, there's another one:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2005/11/22/sigma_170-500mm

why do Sigma make so many variations? It's really confusing...

You are being confused as you are looking at the discontinued lenses like 80-400 or 170-500 too.

However current lenses too are many, 120-400, 150-500 50-500, all stabilized i.e. OS. There's a 120-300 2.8 OS too but that's costlier and heavier.

I have had the 50-500 OS for some time now, and I think like all such lenses, it needs a bit coaxing to perform at it's best... trying to get to know this big guy now

--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/subhrashis

I recently sold my 300/4 with 1.4 tc and got the Sigma 150-500. WIth the built in stabilization I can hand hold and get a much sharper photo than I did with the Nikon using a beanbag on the car window. Very satisfied. You can check out some of my bird photos here http://www.pbase.com/vciinc/woodpeckers . Some of these were taken with the 150-500 handheld

If you only care about the long end, then get a Nikon 300 f4 AFS. It works very well with Nikon 1.4 and 1.7TCs (which give you 400mm and 500mm). And it AF pretty fast in good light.

Otherwise Sigma 50-500 OS may be your best bet. This lens has a very slow aperture. But is very convenient, kind like one lens do it all kind. The lens is sharp. But it's a little bulky.

Eric

I've been using the Sigma 50-500mm OS in Alaska for the past week and a half. The IQ is pretty good at the long end stopped down to f8. I had quite a few misfocused shots on moving subjects and it hunts a lot (especially in low light) but my D5100 body is probably largely to blame. The lack of subject isolation shooting at f8 is my biggest gripe but still a great lens for the price.

Shot this today at the Homer Spit.





--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/exds/