Which Sigma lens 120-400, 50-500 or 150-500
Question is in the title really.
I've read the 150-500 is a bit soft at the long end, but also heard the same of the 120-400.
The 50-500 appears a little better but £400 more.
Your experiences would be appreciated.
It's going on my D5000 too
50-500? are you referring to the OS version. That one (OS) apparently is a very good lens. I am still trying to save money to replace it with the non OS version I have.
Canon 7D / 50D (40D premature death. Long Live Canon)
70-200/2.8 - 135/2.0 - 100/2.0 - 85/1.8 - 35/2.0
EX 50-500 - EX 120-300/2.8 - 18-200OS - EX 18-50/2.8 II - EX 50/1.4
TOKINA 12-24/4 (for sale1) - TAMRON 28-75/2.8, 17-50/2.8 - Samyang 8/3.5
KENKO Pro300 2XTC - 1.4XTC
2 years ago I needed a telezoom 500mm or 400mm for wildlife photo - Nikon zoom lenses were out of my budget so I was looking for a Sigma 120-400mm or a Sigma 150-500mm.
After surfing on some forum about the Sigma zoom lenses, I found a review written by Darwin Wiggett - Lens Review: The Sigma 120-400 4.5-5.6 APO HSM Telephoto Zoom.
I bought a Sigma 120-400mm after reading this review.
Hope that helps.
I have the 150-500 OS version. Like it a lot. You may want to look at the Flickr group dedicated to this lens. There are many opinionated people that like to say bad things about this lens, but 1758 people that belong to that group would beg to differ.
There is a 50 - 500 non OS and an OS model, get the OS model. Getting a 500mm lens with image stabilization at a cost you think is high, is in fact quite low and a bargain. In a long lens, you want stabilization to get images in lower light.
"Photography is, indeed, an inclusive language."
I had the Non stabilized Bigma for two years and was not always happy with its performance at 500mm. I sold it and bought a Tamron adaptall 400mm f4. It was much better than the old Bigma as far as IQ goes but I missed the Zoom and I occasionally missed the autofocus. In December, I bought the Bigma OS and even though I have not had a chance to really put it through its paces, it appears to be much better than the old Bigma at 500mm but not quite as sharp as the old Tamron. The image stabilization works great and the lens I have has a new finish that is in my opinion much better than the old Sigma EX finish that was prone to chip and attract dust. So far, I am thinking that the new 50-500mm OS is a winner. Years ago I had an older 135-400mm Sigma and was so displeased with its performance that I returned it. Seems that Sigma is able to get a little better performance out of each generation of lenses in the Super Zoom category.
Examples taken with the Sigma 120-400mm OS version.
No post processing done other than conversion from nef. RAW to jeg. Best Quality.
I like this lens in preference to the 50-150 which I returned because I did not like the severe zoom creep that the sample I had exhibited.
Some more examples taken with Sigma 120-400mm OS.
Hope you find them useful. Taken in Programmed Auto mode on a tripod with OS off. LL images are in my Gallery.
Bought a used copy of the 120-400 OS HSM and it's great.
It is said that it's a little bit soft but according to many reviews: in comparision with other lenses it never really fails.
I have quite a few result on flickr:
. Most of them are cropped and not extremely pp'd (a little sharpening).
OTOH you will never have enough millimeters and after all 500 is more than 400.
I just purchased the Sigma 50-500, got it this past Friday. While I am barely a novice in the age of digital cameras (own a Nikon D5100) I'm a newbie shooting with a telephoto lens as this is my first. I'll post a couple of pics that I took over the weekend that were shot at between 400 and 500mm and let you decide. These pics represent only the second time I've used the Sigma Bigma. I'm no expert in the finer qualities of an image but I'm very pleased with these.
Feedback always welcome.
Thanks and as always, good birding!
"I just purchased the Sigma 50-500, got it this past Friday. While I am barely a novice in the age of digital cameras (own a Nikon D5100) I'm a newbie shooting with a telephoto lens as this is my first. I'll post a couple of pics that I took over the weekend that were shot at between 400 and 500mm and let you decide. These pics represent only the second time I've used the Sigma Bigma. I'm no expert in the finer qualities of an image but I'm very pleased with these.
Feedback always welcome."
These are very nice. Pretty representative of what the Bigma can do. I had the EX version and now own the OS Bigma and can offer that F* seems to be a sweet spot with this lens and I generally use TAV with my K5 with shutter speed set to at least 640 (preferably higher) and the ISO range set from 80-1600, or 80-3200 on cloudy days. I have generally used a monopod but with the OS, I am using it more handheld.
Just got the 150-500 mm yesterday. Early indications are the reach is about what I had expected and image quality is good. Need to try out in anger now.
I use a Nikon D5100 and bought the Sigma 50-500 in Feb. of this year. Performs well in good light conditions outdoors. I have shot birds, tennis matches and baseball games with good results even at full zoom. I found it's limited if almost unusable in low light condition say like in a basketball gym or on a very overcast day. Forget about stopping the action at a baseball game after the sun goes down, under artificial light, maybe in a major league ballpark, but not at a local college.
Another thought is the weight of this lens. I find it almost impossible to hand hold, and can't get the results that I want unless I us a tripod or monopod.
Now the bad news - I have had this lens for 2 months and the autofocus quit working this past Friday when I went to shoot a baseball game.
After owning this lens for 2 months I could not recommend this lens.
Thanks and as always, good birding!
I got the 150-500 and I don't see any softness to it. You tell me! I bought the lens spur of the moment on a florida trip and have been very happy with it.