Is it worth trading Sigma 150-500mm OS for Sigma 150-600mm C?

[Ria1]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

 

[saaber1]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

Ria1, I haven't used the 150-500 so I can't contrast directly. But I will say that the 150-600C is very fast in focusing and I don't think you will be disappointed in that regard at all. In regards to hit or miss, I found it to be pretty consistent from shot to shot.

One thing I would say is that the copy-to-copy variability between a given lens is quite large (and this goes for the Nikon 200-500 also -reference photography life's review where they had to go through 3 copies to find a sharp one). So there is a "hit or miss" to consider in regards to whether you get a very sharp, sharp, or unsharp copy of new lens.

So in terms of risk vs. reward I would say:

1) Focus speed: little or no risk IMO, but I would defer to someone who has owened both lenses.

2) Image quality due to variability of the new lens: high risk IMO

3) Image quality of a good copy of new lens vs. the 150-500: I can't say as I have not used both. I would say find someone who has owned both lenses and/or reviews and/or sites like pixel peeper which allow you to look at full resolution real world pics. Fred Miranda threads often have high Resolution photos. Mansod on DPreview has some great Sigma C photos if you want to search for his postings. The more full resolution pics you see the better IMO in terms of seeing if there is a real world difference in Image quality.

Some other items you may want to factor in:

a) a refurb 200-500 Nikon can be had for $1049 right now from a third party dealer.

b) cyber monday is around the corner and last year had the Sigma 150-600C for $700 new with USA warranty.

c) Sigma 150-600 Sports is available form time to time for $1200-1300 used.

Thanks, Mike

P.S. I just saw that you are using the d7100. For me the d7100 underperformed in terms of autofocus (accuracy, not speed, both are very fast focusing) on both the C and S versions of the Sigma 150-600. So D7100 aut0focus performance may be a limiting factor also. Renting the C version would answer all your questions in one day and elimainate many of the risks (except copy-to-copy variability -unless you end up buying the copy that you rented).

Also I forgot to mention that the dock allows you to fine tune the focus of the C or S versions at 4 different focal lengths x 4 different distances = 16 points. Also the custom lens switch modes of the C and S are very helpful IMO and would be an upgrade over the 150-500. you can customize autofocus behavior, af behavior, and focus limits. You can even customize how much of a turn is required before the manual focus dial overides the AF.

 

[bob sandy]

Saaber: What store had the Sigma on sale for $700 on Cyber Monday? Thank you. Bob

 

[yodog]

Bob, the $700 deal was through buydig.com. I got in on the deal and love the lens. I couldn't hit the "buy" button fast enough. You might check newegg as they might have a deal right now (according to slickdeals anyway). Good luck.

--
Give the gift of life - donate blood

 

[saaber1]

Saaber: What store had the Sigma on sale for $700 on Cyber Monday? Thank you. Bob

It was Buydig. See https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/56860798 Thx

 

[Ria1]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

Ria1, I haven't used the 150-500 so I can't contrast directly. But I will say that the 150-600C is very fast in focusing and I don't think you will be disappointed in that regard at all. In regards to hit or miss, I found it to be pretty consistent from shot to shot.

One thing I would say is that the copy-to-copy variability between a given lens is quite large (and this goes for the Nikon 200-500 also -reference photography life's review where they had to go through 3 copies to find a sharp one). So there is a "hit or miss" to consider in regards to whether you get a very sharp, sharp, or unsharp copy of new lens.

So in terms of risk vs. reward I would say:

1) Focus speed: little or no risk IMO, but I would defer to someone who has owened both lenses.

2) Image quality due to variability of the new lens: high risk IMO

3) Image quality of a good copy of new lens vs. the 150-500: I can't say as I have not used both. I would say find someone who has owned both lenses and/or reviews and/or sites like pixel peeper which allow you to look at full resolution real world pics. Fred Miranda threads often have high Resolution photos. Mansod on DPreview has some great Sigma C photos if you want to search for his postings. The more full resolution pics you see the better IMO in terms of seeing if there is a real world difference in Image quality.

Some other items you may want to factor in:

a) a refurb 200-500 Nikon can be had for $1049 right now from a third party dealer.

b) cyber monday is around the corner and last year had the Sigma 150-600C for $700 new with USA warranty.

c) Sigma 150-600 Sports is available form time to time for $1200-1300 used.

Thanks, Mike

P.S. I just saw that you are using the d7100. For me the d7100 underperformed in terms of autofocus (accuracy, not speed, both are very fast focusing) on both the C and S versions of the Sigma 150-600. So D7100 aut0focus performance may be a limiting factor also. Renting the C version would answer all your questions in one day and elimainate many of the risks (except copy-to-copy variability -unless you end up buying the copy that you rented).

Also I forgot to mention that the dock allows you to fine tune the focus of the C or S versions at 4 different focal lengths x 4 different distances = 16 points. Also the custom lens switch modes of the C and S are very helpful IMO and would be an upgrade over the 150-500. you can customize autofocus behavior, af behavior, and focus limits. You can even customize how much of a turn is required before the manual focus dial overides the AF.

Thank you for replying. It's good to hear real world user accounts of a lens. I'm glad to hear that you find this lens consistent in it's focusing speed. My 150-500mm will occasionally lose focus & have to travel it's full focus distance before reacquiring focus. This is frustrating & has caused missed shots.

I will definitely be checking out the sites you've recommended. And will be on the lookout for upcoming sales, those sound like awesome deals!

Also, re the d7100 autofocus accuracy, I hadn't really thought about that. It is something for me to test out though.

The ability to use Sigma's dock to customize the 150-600mm C is an attractive option. It's one of the reasons I've put this lens as the front runner for me.

--

https://www.flickr.com/photos/shutterbiscuit/

 

[David Pavlich]

I sure do like my "C". It's a terrific lens. The Sport is a bit better, but for me, the C was the better choice.

David

 

[billslatteryjr]

Having had a Sigma 150-600mm some years before getting a Sigma 150-600mm C, I can tell you that there was what I would call a good deal of difference in the copies I had. My Nikon 80-400mm G that replaced the Sigma 150-500 was a good bit sharper at the longer end than the Sigma 150-500. So I sold the Sigma not long after getting the Nikon. Reason I bring up the 80-400G is because every review I've seen where they compared the 150-600 lenses to the 80-400G has all the newer lenses sharper than the 80-400G at 400mm. As for focusing, sorry never used the old Sigma for BIF or sports. But the Sigma C is definitely usable for sports in the daylight. Is it worth it for you? Don't know you well enough to say.

 

[Daniel Lauring]

In my experience the new Sigma and Tamron 150-600's are considerably sharper at the long end than the Sigma 150-500.

 

[jshen808]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

The experience with my Sigma 150-600mm Contemporary is, it works well with my D3100 (14mp) and D500 (20mp), but is optically challenged when used with my D3300 (24mp).. therefore, for me, I would not use it with the D7100 (24mp).. I recommend getting the Tamron 150-600mm lens instead.

 

[Tord S Eriksson]

In my experience the new Sigma and Tamron 150-600's are considerably sharper at the long end than the Sigma 150-500.

Agree totally with Daniel, my copy of the Sigma 150-500 was OK to around 400mm, while the newer lenses are impressive all the way to 600, at least my Sigma 150-600 Sports is very good!

 

[Tord S Eriksson]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

Not quite what you've asked about, but here we go:

I have the Sigma 150-600 Sports (which now is 30% more costlier than the C, at least here, and locally costs exactly the same as the Nikon 200-500), and I used to have the 150-500. My what a difference!

The newer lenses are better every way!

The Sports is far less flare sensitive, it's water & dust resistant (the 150-500 definitely is not), it can be fine-tuned with the dock (I got my dock for free - not possible with the 150-500, of course), and the Sports (and the C) are far sharper at 500 than the 150-500 ever was!

I also had the 120-400, which was really nice in the wide end, and, according to the lens engineer that serviced my lens, sharper than the 150-500, but I got more hits with the 150-500 @ 400 than I ever got with the 120-400 that's for sure.

The newer lenses are so much better optically, but Nikon seem to still have quality issues with their 200-500 (some are superb, some suffer from bad decentering, and it is hard to get help from Nikon, as they seems to think it is you that is imagining things).

Sigma today is far from Sigma yesterday, and Tamron has also upped the manufacturing standards.

 

[Tord S Eriksson]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

Ria1, I haven't used the 150-500 so I can't contrast directly. But I will say that the 150-600C is very fast in focusing and I don't think you will be disappointed in that regard at all. In regards to hit or miss, I found it to be pretty consistent from shot to shot.

One thing I would say is that the copy-to-copy variability between a given lens is quite large (and this goes for the Nikon 200-500 also -reference photography life's review where they had to go through 3 copies to find a sharp one). So there is a "hit or miss" to consider in regards to whether you get a very sharp, sharp, or unsharp copy of new lens.

So in terms of risk vs. reward I would say:

1) Focus speed: little or no risk IMO, but I would defer to someone who has owened both lenses.

2) Image quality due to variability of the new lens: high risk IMO

3) Image quality of a good copy of new lens vs. the 150-500: I can't say as I have not used both. I would say find someone who has owned both lenses and/or reviews and/or sites like pixel peeper which allow you to look at full resolution real world pics. Fred Miranda threads often have high Resolution photos. Mansod on DPreview has some great Sigma C photos if you want to search for his postings. The more full resolution pics you see the better IMO in terms of seeing if there is a real world difference in Image quality.

Some other items you may want to factor in:

a) a refurb 200-500 Nikon can be had for $1049 right now from a third party dealer.

b) cyber monday is around the corner and last year had the Sigma 150-600C for $700 new with USA warranty.

c) Sigma 150-600 Sports is available form time to time for $1200-1300 used.

Thanks, Mike

P.S. I just saw that you are using the d7100. For me the d7100 underperformed in terms of autofocus (accuracy, not speed, both are very fast focusing) on both the C and S versions of the Sigma 150-600. So D7100 aut0focus performance may be a limiting factor also. Renting the C version would answer all your questions in one day and elimainate many of the risks (except copy-to-copy variability -unless you end up buying the copy that you rented).

Also I forgot to mention that the dock allows you to fine tune the focus of the C or S versions at 4 different focal lengths x 4 different distances = 16 points. Also the custom lens switch modes of the C and S are very helpful IMO and would be an upgrade over the 150-500. you can customize autofocus behavior, af behavior, and focus limits. You can even customize how much of a turn is required before the manual focus dial overides the AF.

I've had very good results with the basic D3300 and the Sigma 150-600 Sports, but, as always, VR/OS is an issue as usual. Certain shutter speeds, on tripod, works better with with VR/OS off, while handheld is no problem with it on.

The minimum shutter speed for shake free images = 1 / (focal length (in mm) x crop factor) still applies, so at 500 mm (if you use a APS-C camera) you should use 1/750 sec at the most, to be on the safe side.

VR/OS on, and you can, on a good day, get away with a 1/100th, or so.


Typical birdwatcher, male.


Barnacle geese passing by.


Eurasian Robin (don't know how to tell the sexes apart).


Another robin.


Female black redstart


Male goldcrest


Another male goldcrest.

All shot with tripod, VR/OS off.

--
Tord_2 (at) photographer (dot) net
Mostly Nikon V1, V2, J5, & D600, user

 

[Tord S Eriksson]

Having had a Sigma 150-600mm some years before getting a Sigma 150-600mm C, I can tell you that there was what I would call a good deal of difference in the copies I had. My Nikon 80-400mm G that replaced the Sigma 150-500 was a good bit sharper at the longer end than the Sigma 150-500. So I sold the Sigma not long after getting the Nikon. Reason I bring up the 80-400G is because every review I've seen where they compared the 150-600 lenses to the 80-400G has all the newer lenses sharper than the 80-400G at 400mm. As for focusing, sorry never used the old Sigma for BIF or sports. But the Sigma C is definitely usable for sports in the daylight. Is it worth it for you? Don't know you well enough to say.

I had the newer version of the 80-400 G for a long time, but I eventually replaced it with the Sigma 150-600 Sports, which, although it is much more cumbersome, focuses faster, and is far easier to zoom in and out with (simply a pull-push operation, no twisting needed), and is definitely sharper in the long end!

Shooting the moon with the 80-400 was not a success for me, and it didn't help that Nikon serviced it (they found it 'all was within limits'). I know now that what I saw probably was an effect of less than perfect centering.

 

[Dbltfarmer]

I completely agree with the above post. Having the 150-500 before I got the 150-600 sport, the sport is heads above the 150-500. Faster autofocus and much better IQ at the long end. It is also nice to have the weather sealing.

 

[mansod]

I've had the Sigma 150-500mm OS for a few years now and am currently using it on a Nikon D7100 body. I've managed to get good images with it but find that it is a hit or miss. I'm wondering if the new Contemporary lens is worth the upgrade? I'd love to buy the Nikon 200-500mm but it's just out of my price range. For those who have gone to the 150-600mm C from the 150-500mm OS, is there a remarkable improvement that's worth the additional cost? The extra reach would be nice but I'm mainly looking for something that is sharper on the long end and that is quicker to focus.

You can check out John Owen on flickr. He uses the D7200 and the Sigma C 150-600.

Loading…

www.flickr.com

Unfortunately, it does not look like he allows original size downloads on flickr anymore.

 

[Macro guy]

The 150-600 C seems to be CONSIDERABLY better than the 150-500 across the entire zoom range, but the differences seem more and more pronounced toward the longer end. In fact, it seems that the two lenses are not even in the same league.

Check out the this comparison

 

[Tord S Eriksson]

The 150-600 C seems to be CONSIDERABLY better than the 150-500 across the entire zoom range, but the differences seem more and more pronounced toward the longer end. In fact, it seems that the two lenses are not even in the same league.

Check out the this comparison

My experience is the same, that Sigma's zooms have improved a lot in later years, and I clearly remember that the 120-400 was slightly better than the 150-500 in the wide end, but the latter was far better than the 120-400 at 400, of course.

 

[nuke12]

I had the Sigma 150-500 and I was never happy with the lens. I had to step it down to f/8 to get any kind of a decent image out of it.

I have the older Tamron 150-600 and it chews up the Sigma. The Tamron is still not the best lens at 600mm but I'll take what it gives me over the Sigma.

 

[Ria1]

I sure do like my "C". It's a terrific lens. The Sport is a bit better, but for me, the C was the better choice.

David