Nikon 200-500 VR vs Sigma 150-600 C

Started 2 weeks ago | Discussions thread
OP darrinlingle Contributing Member • Posts: 910
Re: Sigma 150-600 S (not C)

John Koerner wrote:

darrinlingle wrote:

the only problem with a 300 and 1.4x is that it's not enough reach. 600mm is many times barely enough reach.

Add a 2x Extender and it's a 600mm (~ effectively 900mm on a D500 or other DX).

The 300 PF + 1.4x TC + 2x TC is still much lighter than any of the zooms you mention, better image quality, too. It also subs as a macro (1:3 with 1.4x, 1:2 with 2x Ext.).

These shots were taken with the D500 + 300 PF + 1.4 TC (~640mm equivalent):

These shots were taken with the D500 + 300 PF + 2xTC (~900mm equivalent):

my budget for a wildlife lens is $3k, new or used.

The 300 PF + both Teleconverters fits within it.

i had the tamron 150-600 g2 and it seemed sharper with better color and contrast than the sigma 150-600 C. test results like look like the sigma C is better.

Again, the Sigma 150-600mm (S, not C) is the best of the bunch, but it is monstrously-huge. If I am going to carry something that huge around, it's got to be "best in class," not just "pretty good."

IMO, the 300 PF is better than any zoom, lighter, more comfortable. Although it's slightly more @ $1,900 (especially with 2 TCs, which will bring you right up there to $3,000), it is a treat to own and carry on a hike, and it delivers the goods closer to a par with the best lenses Nikon has to offer. That's my $0.02, anyway.

Best of luck to you.

beautiful shots. great sharpness, color, and contrast.

-- hide signature --

Darrin Lingle, Colorado

 darrinlingle's gear list:darrinlingle's gear list
Carl Zeiss Distagon T* 2,8/25 Nikon D800E Sony a7 II Nikon D850 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR +5 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow